Image fusion currently plays an important role in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa). Selecting and developing a good image fusion algorithm is the core task of achieving image fusion, which determines whether the fusion image obtained is of good quality and can meet the actual needs of clinical application. In recent years, it has become one of the research hotspots of medical image fusion. In order to make a comprehensive study on the methods of medical image fusion, this paper reviewed the relevant literature published at home and abroad in recent years. Image fusion technologies were classified, and image fusion algorithms were divided into traditional fusion algorithms and deep learning (DL) fusion algorithms. The principles and workflow of some algorithms were analyzed and compared, their advantages and disadvantages were summarized, and relevant medical image data sets were introduced. Finally, the future development trend of medical image fusion algorithm was prospected, and the development direction of medical image fusion technology for the diagnosis of prostate cancer and other major diseases was pointed out.
Objective To investigate the application of the dynamic contrast enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI ) combined with magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Method A total of 60 patients with prostate cancer and 60 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia diagnoses in Sichuan Cancer Hospital from January 2011 to January 2014 were included as prostate cancer group and proliferative group respectively. Sixty healthy individuals during the same period were included as the control group. We used Siemens Avanto 1.5 T high field superconducting MRI for DCE-MRI scan and MRS scan. After the MRS scan was finished, we used the workstation spectroscopy tab spectral analysis. Eventually we got the crest lines of prostate metabolites choline (Cho), creatine (Cr) and citrate (Cit). Then we calculated Cho/Cit, (Cho+Cr)/Cit and their average. Results Comparing the signal value in 21 seconds, 1 minute, 2 minutes of DCE-MRI, the differences among the three groups were statistically significant (P<0.05). Comparing the results of spectral analysis, the differences among the three groups were statistically significant (P<0.05). The sensitivity was 89.67%, the specificity was 95.45% and the accuracy was 94.34% when using DCE-MRI combined with MRS. Conclusion DCE-MRI combined with MRS greatly improves the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the diagnosis of prostate cancer; it has a great application value in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the association between the variants of HNF1B gene and the risk of prostate cancer.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, CBM and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect case-control studies on the association between the variants of HNF1B gene and risk of prostate cancer from inception to December, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed using Stata 14.0 software.ResultsA total of 15 case-control studies involving 30 532 patients and 38 832 controls were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: there was a strong significant association between rs4430796 variants (Gvs.A: OR=0.802, 95%CI 0.784 to 0.821, P<0.001; GGvs.AA: OR=0.659, 95%CI 0.606 to 0.717, P<0.001; AGvs.AA: OR=0.762, 95%CI 0.714 to 0.814, P<0.001), rs11649743 variants (Avs.G: OR=0.875, 95%CI 0.820 to 0.941, P<0.001; AAvs.GG: OR=0.669, 95%CI 0.564 to 0.792, P<0.001; AGvs.GG: OR=0.855, 95%CI 0.798 to 0.916, P<0.001), rs7501939 variants (Avs.G: OR=0.833, 95%CI 0.807 to 0.859, P<0.001), rs3760511 variants (Avs.C: OR=0.834, 95%CI 0.803 to 0.868, P<0.001) and risk of prostate cancer.ConclusionsCurrent evidence shows that HNF1B gene variants are associated with risk of prostate cancer. Due to limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high quality studies are required to verify the above conclusion.
Prostate cancer ranks second among the causes of death of malignant tumors in middle-aged and elderly men. A considerable number of patients are not easily detected in early-stage prostate cancer. Although traditional imaging examinations are of high value in the diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer, they also have certain limitations. With the development of nuclear medicine instruments and molecular probes, molecular imaging is playing an increasingly important role in the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer. Positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET/CT) using prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) as a probe has gained increasing recognition. This article will review the latest progress in the application of PET/CT using probes for targeting PSMA to imaging and treatment of prostate cancer, in order to provide a theoretical basis for the application of probes for targeting PSMA in the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer.
Prostate cancer is the most common malignant tumor in male urinary system, and the morbidity and mortality rate are increasing year by year. Traditional imaging examinations have some limitations in the diagnosis of prostate cancer, and the advent of molecular imaging probes and imaging technology have provided new ideas for the integration of diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer. In recent years, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) has attracted much attention as a target for imaging and treatment of prostate cancer. PSMA ligand positron emission tomography (PET) has important reference value in the diagnosis, initial staging, detection of biochemical recurrence and metastasis, clinical decision-making guidance and efficacy evaluation of prostate cancer. This article briefly reviews the clinical research and application progress on PSMA ligand PET imaging in prostate cancer in recent years, so as to raise the efficiency of clinical applications.
Objective To systemically evaluate the accuracy of f/t-PSA for diagnosing prostate cancer with a t-PSA level of 4-10ng/mL through meta-analysis. Methods A literature search of CBM, VIP, CNKI and Wanfang Data from 1999 to 2009 was performed. Related journals were also searched manually. Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality according to QUADAS items. Heterogenous studies and meta-analysis were conducted by Meta-Disc1.4 software. The analysis was based on different critical values of f/t-PSA (0.1, 0.15, 0.2, 0.25, and 0.3). Results Total 18 studies involving 2217 subjects were included. No threshold effect was found. But there was heterogeneity due to other factors. The meta–analysis showed that, the sensitivity of f/t-PSA with the critical value of 0.15 for the diagnosis of prostate cancer with a t-PSA level of 4-10ng/mL was 75% (95%CI 70%-79%), and the specificity was 81% (95%CI 78%-84%). The area under SROC curve was 0.883 5, and the Q index was 0.814 0. Conclusion The f/t-PSA is a better index for diagnosing prostate cancer with t-PSA levels between 4 and 10ng/mL. And it is reasonable to consider 0.15 as a more suitable critical value.
ObjectiveTo investigate the expression of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) in prostate cancer tissue and explore its relations with tumor angiogenesis. MethodsThe expression of TNF-α and CD105 were detected with two-step immunohistochemical staining technique in 20 cases of benign prostatic hyperplasia and 50 cases of prostate cancer between January 2010 and January 2012, and microvessel density (MVD) marked with CD105 was also measured. ResultsThe expressions of TNF-α and CD105 were higher in prostate cancer (41.72±8.67, 20.15±2.67) than those in benign prostatic hyperplasia (21.01±3.85, 4.34±1.67) (t'=13.990, P<0.001; t'=29.771, P<0.001). TNF-α and MVD were not correlated with age and size of tumor, but were positively correlated with tumor differentiation degree (rs=0.847, P<0.001; rs=0.776, P<0.001) and negatively correlated with clinical grades (rs=-0.769, P<0.001; rs=-0.842, P<0.001). ConclusionThe result indicates that over expression of TNF-α exists in prostate cancer. It may play an important role in the anginogenesis and carcinogenesis of prostate cancer.
Objective To comprehensively evaluate the association between TNF-α gene ?308 G/A polymorphism and the risk of prostate cancer. Methods A meta-analysis was performed to analyze the association between ?308 G/A polymorphism and the risk of prostate cancer risk. Results A total of 11 case-control studies (4 919 cases and 5 210 controls) were included in this meta-analysis. The result showed no statistically significant differences in all genotype distribution between prostate cancer cases and controls: dominant model (OR=1.11, 95%CI 0.90 to 1.36, P=0.33), recessive model (OR=0.91, 95%CI 0.70 to 1.18, P=0.47), GA versus GG (OR=1.11, 95%CI 0.90 to 1.37, P=0.33), AA versus GG (OR=0.92, 95%CI 0.71 to 1.20, P=0.55), A versus G (OR=1.07, 95%CI 0.91 to 1.26, P=0.39). In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, no statistically differences were found between prostate cancer cases and controls. Conclusion This results of meta-analysis suggests that TNF-α gene –308G/A polymorphism may not be a risk factor of prostate cancer. Due to the limited quantity of the includied studies, further studies are needed to validate the above conclusion.
Prostate cancer is a common disease in the USA and Europe, with a gradually increasing incidence in China, and presents a significant health burden for older men. The lack of modifiable risk factors has made early detection as a strategy to reduce mortality. Current methods of screening involve the measurement of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal examination followed by biopsy. With PSA screening evidence of level I absent, the evidence on the use of PSA as a screening test is still highly controversial. Furthermore, there is controversy over whether screen-detected lesions will become clinically significant. There are three major treatment options for localized disease: radical prostatectomy, radical radiotherapy and monitoring with treatment if required. There is no evidence of randomized controlled trial (RCT) to suggest a survival advantage of any of these treatments. Opinions about the related benefits and risks of screening vary widely. In the absence of RCT of benefit for screening, many now suggest “informed consensus” screening, which encourages a discussion between the patient and his physician with both sides informed of all of the issues.