Rajan Gupta

Overview:

Abdominal Imaging; Multiparametric MR imaging of prostate cancer; MR imaging of the hepatobiliary system; Applications of dual energy CT in the abdomen and pelvis

Positions:

Associate Professor of Radiology

Radiology, Abdominal Imaging
School of Medicine

Assistant Professor in the Department of Surgery

Surgery, Urology
School of Medicine

Member of the Duke Cancer Institute

Duke Cancer Institute
School of Medicine

Education:

M.D. 2003

Northwestern University

Grants:

Quantitative Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (DCE-MRI) of Bone Marrow In Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Administered By
Radiology, Abdominal Imaging
Role
Principal Investigator
Start Date
End Date

Publications:

Post-treatment prostate MRI.

Accurate early detection of recurrent prostate cancer after surgical or nonsurgical treatment is increasingly relevant in the era of evolving options for salvage therapy. The importance of differentiating between local tumor recurrence, distant metastatic disease, and a combination of both in a patient with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer is essential for appropriate treatment selection. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the best test for localization and characterization of locally residual or recurrent prostate cancer. It is essential for the radiologist involved in prostate MRI interpretation to be familiar with key imaging findings and advantages of different sequences to reach a confident diagnosis in the post-treatment setting. In this pictorial review, we present imaging findings of post-treatment prostate MRI including expected post-treatment anatomy and imaging characteristics, and the typical appearances of local tumor recurrence after radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, and focal therapy for prostate cancer. While a multi-parametric MRI approach remains key just as in the treatment-naïve gland, this review emphasizes the much greater importance of the dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI sequence for evaluation in the post-treatment setting.
Authors
Potretzke, TA; Froemming, AT; Gupta, RT
MLA Citation
Potretzke, Theodora A., et al. “Post-treatment prostate MRI..” Abdom Radiol (Ny), Dec. 2019. Pubmed, doi:10.1007/s00261-019-02348-x.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1423420
PMID
31788708
Source
pubmed
Published In
Abdom Radiol (Ny)
Published Date
DOI
10.1007/s00261-019-02348-x

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Post-Treatment Follow-up and Active Surveillance of Clinically Localized Renal Cell Cancer.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) accounts for most malignant renal tumors and is considered the most lethal of all urologic cancers. For follow-up of patients with treated or untreated RCC and those with neoplasms suspected to represent RCC, radiologic imaging is the most useful component of surveillance, as most relapses and cases of disease progression are identified when patients are asymptomatic. Understanding the strengths and limitations of the various imaging modalities for the detection of disease, recurrence, or progression is important when planning follow-up regimens. This publication addresses the appropriate imaging examinations for asymptomatic patients who have been treated for RCC with radical or partial nephrectomy, or ablative therapies. It also discusses the appropriate imaging examinations for asymptomatic patients with localized biopsy-proven or suspected RCC undergoing active surveillance. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.
Authors
Expert Panel on Urological Imaging,; Purysko, AS; Nikolaidis, P; Dogra, VS; Ganeshan, D; Gore, JL; Gupta, RT; Heilbrun, ME; Khatri, G; Kishan, AU; Lyshchik, A; Savage, SJ; Smith, AD; Wang, ZJ; Wolfman, DJ; Wong-You-Cheong, JJ; Yoo, DC; Lockhart, ME
MLA Citation
Expert Panel on Urological Imaging, Mark E., et al. “ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Post-Treatment Follow-up and Active Surveillance of Clinically Localized Renal Cell Cancer..” J Am Coll Radiol, vol. 16, no. 11S, Nov. 2019, pp. S399–416. Pubmed, doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2019.05.022.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1417829
PMID
31685108
Source
pubmed
Published In
Journal of the American College of Radiology : Jacr
Volume
16
Published Date
Start Page
S399
End Page
S416
DOI
10.1016/j.jacr.2019.05.022

PI-RADS: Past, present, and future.

Prostate cancer (PCa) is extremely prevalent and is the most common noncutaneous malignancy and second-most common cause of cancer death in men. In the last decade, there has been dramatic growth in the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for diagnosis and characterization of PCa. With the recent and marked surge in popularity in prostate imaging and, specifically, mpMRI, there has been an increased focus on structured reporting as a means by which to provide more actionable information to the referring clinician as well as to improve diagnostic performance with this technique. This work focuses on the evolution of the major structured reporting system in prostate mpMRI, Prostate Imaging Reporting And Data System (PI-RADS), from its initial proposal and establishment in 2012 as PI-RADS v. 1 to its most current iteration, PI-RADS v. 2.1. This will highlight the key elements that have changed between the versions as well as provide context and rationale for these changes. In addition, this work explores what future iterations of PI-RADS could look like based on current limitations of the system as well as explore areas for future growth of prostate mpMRI, including use of the system in active surveillance populations and in the posttreatment setting. Level of Evidence: 5 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019.
Authors
Gupta, RT; Mehta, KA; Turkbey, B; Verma, S
MLA Citation
Gupta, Rajan T., et al. “PI-RADS: Past, present, and future..” J Magn Reson Imaging, Aug. 2019. Pubmed, doi:10.1002/jmri.26896.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1404491
PMID
31397038
Source
pubmed
Published In
J Magn Reson Imaging
Published Date
DOI
10.1002/jmri.26896

A phase III randomized study comparing perioperative nivolumab vs. observation in patients with localized renal cell carcinoma undergoing nephrectomy (PROSPER RCC).

Authors
Harshman, LC; Puligandla, M; Haas, NB; Allaf, M; Drake, CG; McDermott, DF; Signoretti, S; Cella, D; Gupta, RT; Bhatt, RS; Van Allen, EM; Choueiri, TK; Lara, P; Kapoor, A; Heng, DYC; Shuch, BM; Jewett, MAS; George, DJ; Michaelson, MD; Carducci, MA
MLA Citation
Harshman, Lauren Christine, et al. “A phase III randomized study comparing perioperative nivolumab vs. observation in patients with localized renal cell carcinoma undergoing nephrectomy (PROSPER RCC)..” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 35, no. 15_suppl, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), 2017, pp. TPS4596–TPS4596. Crossref, doi:10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.tps4596.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub1383842
Source
crossref
Published In
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
Volume
35
Published Date
Start Page
TPS4596
End Page
TPS4596
DOI
10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.tps4596

Hepatic Hemangioma: Enhancement Pattern at Gadobenate Dimeglumine- and Gadoxetate Disodium-Enhanced 3T MRI

Authors
Marin, D; Gupta, R; Boll, D; Feuerlein, S; Husarik, D; Merkle, E
MLA Citation
Marin, D., et al. “Hepatic Hemangioma: Enhancement Pattern at Gadobenate Dimeglumine- and Gadoxetate Disodium-Enhanced 3T MRI.” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 194, no. 5, AMER ROENTGEN RAY SOC, 2010.
URI
https://scholars.duke.edu/individual/pub896311
Source
wos
Published In
Ajr. American Journal of Roentgenology
Volume
194
Published Date