Literature DB >> 22923722

Interpatient variation in normal peripheral zone apparent diffusion coefficient: effect on the prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness.

Geert J S Litjens1, Thomas Hambrock, Christina Hulsbergen-van de Kaa, Jelle O Barentsz, Henkjan J Huisman.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the interpatient variability of prostate peripheral zone (PZ) apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and its effect on the assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The requirement for institutional review board approval was waived. Intra- and interpatient variation of PZ ADCs was determined by means of repeated measurements of normal ADCs at three magnetic resonance (MR) examinations in a retrospective cohort of 10 consecutive patients who had high prostate-specific antigen levels and negative findings at transrectal ultrasonographically-guided biopsy. In these patients, no signs of PZ cancer were found at all three MR imaging sessions. The effect of interpatient variation on the assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness was examined in a second retrospective cohort of 51 patients with PZ prostate cancer. Whole-mount step-section pathologic evaluation served as reference standard for placement of regions of interest on tumors and normal PZ. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to determine the significance of the interpatient variations in ADCs. Linear logistic regression was used to assess whether incorporating normal PZ ADCs improves the prediction of cancer aggressiveness.
RESULTS: Analysis of variance revealed that interpatient variability (1.2-2.0×10(-3) mm2/sec) was significantly larger than measurement variability (0.068×10(-3) mm2/sec±0.027 [standard deviation]) (P=.0058). Stand-alone tumor ADCs showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.91 for discriminating low-grade versus high-grade tumors. Incorporating normal PZ ADC significantly improved the AUC to 0.96 (P=.0401).
CONCLUSION: PZ ADCs show significant interpatient variation, which has a substantial effect on the prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness. Correcting this effect results in a significant increase in diagnostic accuracy. © RSNA, 2012.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22923722     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12112374

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  20 in total

1.  Can Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values Assist PI-RADS Version 2 DWI Scoring? A Correlation Study Using the PI-RADSv2 and International Society of Urological Pathology Systems.

Authors:  Sonia Gaur; Stephanie Harmon; Lauren Rosenblum; Matthew D Greer; Sherif Mehralivand; Mehmet Coskun; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Joanna H Shih; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Utility of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient measurements and normalized apparent diffusion coefficient ratios in the diagnosis of clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer.

Authors:  Tan B Nguyen; Alexander Ushinsky; Albert Yang; Michael Nguyentat; Sara Fardin; Edward Uchio; Chandana Lall; Thomas Lee; Roozbeh Houshyar
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-06-21       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Prostate cancer radiomics and the promise of radiogenomics.

Authors:  Radka Stoyanova; Mandeep Takhar; Yohann Tschudi; John C Ford; Gabriel Solórzano; Nicholas Erho; Yoganand Balagurunathan; Sanoj Punnen; Elai Davicioni; Robert J Gillies; Alan Pollack
Journal:  Transl Cancer Res       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.241

4.  Short-term reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient estimated from diffusion-weighted MRI of the prostate.

Authors:  Meredith Sadinski; Milica Medved; Ibrahim Karademir; Shiyang Wang; Yahui Peng; Yulei Jiang; Steffen Sammet; Gregory Karczmar; Aytekin Oto
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2015-10

5.  Clinical utility of the normalized apparent diffusion coefficient for preoperative evaluation of the aggressiveness of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ryo Itatani; Tomohiro Namimoto; Akira Yoshimura; Kazuhiro Katahira; Seiichiro Noda; Nobuyuki Toyonari; Kosuke Kitani; Yasuyuki Hamada; Mitsuhiko Kitaoka; Yasuyuki Yamashita
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2014-10-17       Impact factor: 2.374

6.  Prostate cancer magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): multidisciplinary standpoint.

Authors:  Liang Li; Liang Wang; Zhaoyan Feng; Zhiquan Hu; Guoping Wang; Xianglin Yuan; He Wang; Daoyu Hu
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2013-04

7.  Effect of observation size and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in PI-RADS v2.1 assessment category 4 and 5 observations compared to adverse pathological outcomes.

Authors:  Jorge Abreu-Gomez; Daniel Walker; Tareq Alotaibi; Matthew D F McInnes; Trevor A Flood; Nicola Schieda
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2020-03-24       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 8.  Quantitative imaging biomarkers alliance (QIBA) recommendations for improved precision of DWI and DCE-MRI derived biomarkers in multicenter oncology trials.

Authors:  Amita Shukla-Dave; Nancy A Obuchowski; Thomas L Chenevert; Sachin Jambawalikar; Lawrence H Schwartz; Dariya Malyarenko; Wei Huang; Susan M Noworolski; Robert J Young; Mark S Shiroishi; Harrison Kim; Catherine Coolens; Hendrik Laue; Caroline Chung; Mark Rosen; Michael Boss; Edward F Jackson
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 5.119

Review 9.  Whole body MRI: improved lesion detection and characterization with diffusion weighted techniques.

Authors:  Rajpaul Attariwala; Wayne Picker
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.813

10.  Evaluation of the normal-to-diseased apparent diffusion coefficient ratio as an indicator of prostate cancer aggressiveness.

Authors:  Andrei Lebovici; Silviu A Sfrangeu; Diana Feier; Cosmin Caraiani; Ciprian Lucan; Mihai Suciu; Florin Elec; Gheorghita Iacob; Mircea Buruian
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2014-05-10       Impact factor: 1.930

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.