Literature DB >> 23392430

Quantitative analysis of multiparametric prostate MR images: differentiation between prostate cancer and normal tissue and correlation with Gleason score--a computer-aided diagnosis development study.

Yahui Peng1, Yulei Jiang, Cheng Yang, Jeremy Bancroft Brown, Tatjana Antic, Ila Sethi, Christine Schmid-Tannwald, Maryellen L Giger, Scott E Eggener, Aytekin Oto.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the potential utility of a number of parameters obtained at T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) of prostate cancer and assessment of cancer aggressiveness.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant study, multiparametric MR images were acquired with an endorectal coil in 48 patients with prostate cancer (median age, 62.5 years; age range, 44-73 years) who subsequently underwent prostatectomy. A radiologist and a pathologist identified 104 regions of interest (ROIs) (61 cancer ROIs, 43 normal ROIs) based on correlation of histologic and MR findings. The 10th percentile and average apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values, T2-weighted signal intensity histogram skewness, and Tofts K(trans) were analyzed, both individually and combined, via linear discriminant analysis, with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis with area under the curve (AUC) as figure of merit, to distinguish cancer foci from normal foci. Spearman rank-order correlation (ρ) was calculated between cancer foci Gleason score (GS) and image features.
RESULTS: AUC (maximum likelihood estimate ± standard error) values in the differentiation of prostate cancer from normal foci of 10th percentile ADC, average ADC, T2-weighted skewness, and K(trans) were 0.92 ± 0.03, 0.89 ± 0.03, 0.86 ± 0.04, and 0.69 ± 0.04, respectively. The combination of 10th percentile ADC, average ADC, and T2-weighted skewness yielded an AUC value for the same task of 0.95 ± 0.02. GS correlated moderately with 10th percentile ADC (ρ = -0.34, P = .008), average ADC (ρ = -0.30, P = .02), and K(trans) (ρ = 0.38, P = .004).
CONCLUSION: The combination of 10th percentile ADC, average ADC, and T2-weighted skewness with CAD is promising in the differentiation of prostate cancer from normal tissue. ADC image features and K(trans) moderately correlate with GS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23392430      PMCID: PMC6940008          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13121454

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


  50 in total

1.  Detection of prostate cancer by integration of line-scan diffusion, T2-mapping and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging; a multichannel statistical classifier.

Authors:  Ian Chan; William Wells; Robert V Mulkern; Steven Haker; Jianqing Zhang; Kelly H Zou; Stephan E Maier; Clare M C Tempany
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Improvement in radiologists' detection of clustered microcalcifications on mammograms. The potential of computer-aided diagnosis.

Authors:  H P Chan; K Doi; C J Vyborny; R A Schmidt; C E Metz; K L Lam; T Ogura; Y Z Wu; H MacMahon
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 6.016

3.  Prostate MRI: diffusion-weighted imaging at 1.5T correlates better with prostatectomy Gleason Grades than TRUS-guided biopsies in peripheral zone tumours.

Authors:  Leonardo Kayat Bittencourt; Jelle O Barentsz; Luiz Carlos Duarte de Miranda; Emerson Leandro Gasparetto
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-09-14       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images?

Authors:  Baris Turkbey; Vijay P Shah; Yuxi Pang; Marcelino Bernardo; Sheng Xu; Jochen Kruecker; Julia Locklin; Angelo A Baccala; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Maria J Merino; Joanna H Shih; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Automated detection of prostatic adenocarcinoma from high-resolution ex vivo MRI.

Authors:  Anant Madabhushi; Michael D Feldman; Dimitris N Metaxas; John Tomaszeweski; Deborah Chute
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 10.048

6.  Prostate cancer screening: the clinical value of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic MR imaging in combination with T2-weighted imaging.

Authors:  Akihiro Tanimoto; Jun Nakashima; Hidaka Kohno; Hiroshi Shinmoto; Sachio Kuribayashi
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 4.813

7.  Diffusion-weighted MRI of peripheral zone prostate cancer: comparison of tumor apparent diffusion coefficient with Gleason score and percentage of tumor on core biopsy.

Authors:  Courtney A Woodfield; Glenn A Tung; David J Grand; John A Pezzullo; Jason T Machan; Joseph F Renzulli
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Microvessel density is not increased in prostate cancer: digital imaging of routine sections and tissue microarrays.

Authors:  Maria Tretiakova; Tatjana Antic; David Binder; Masha Kocherginsky; Chuanhong Liao; Jerome B Taxy; Aytekin Oto
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2012-10-12       Impact factor: 3.466

9.  Computerized analysis of prostate lesions in the peripheral zone using dynamic contrast enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Pieter C Vos; Thomas Hambrock; Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Jurgen J Fütterer; Jelle O Barentsz; Henkjan J Huisman
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Predicting the risk of patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 to harbor a higher grade cancer.

Authors:  Ofer N Gofrit; Kevin C Zorn; Jerome B Taxy; Shang Lin; Gregory P Zagaja; Gary D Steinberg; Arieh L Shalhav
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-09-17       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  69 in total

1.  Computer-aided diagnosis of prostate cancer with MRI.

Authors:  Baowei Fei
Journal:  Curr Opin Biomed Eng       Date:  2017-09

2.  Restriction spectrum imaging improves MRI-based prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  Kevin C McCammack; Natalie M Schenker-Ahmed; Nathan S White; Shaun R Best; Robert M Marks; Jared Heimbigner; Christopher J Kane; J Kellogg Parsons; Joshua M Kuperman; Hauke Bartsch; Rahul S Desikan; Rebecca A Rakow-Penner; Michael A Liss; Daniel J A Margolis; Steven S Raman; Ahmed Shabaik; Anders M Dale; David S Karow
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2016-05

3.  Computer-aided diagnosis prior to conventional interpretation of prostate mpMRI: an international multi-reader study.

Authors:  Matthew D Greer; Nathan Lay; Joanna H Shih; Tristan Barrett; Leonardo Kayat Bittencourt; Samuel Borofsky; Ismail Kabakus; Yan Mee Law; Jamie Marko; Haytham Shebel; Francesca V Mertan; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Ronald M Summers; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Assessment of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness by Use of the Combination of Quantitative DWI and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Andreas M Hötker; Yousef Mazaheri; Ömer Aras; Junting Zheng; Chaya S Moskowitz; Tatsuo Gondo; Kazuhiro Matsumoto; Hedvig Hricak; Oguz Akin
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Haralick texture analysis of prostate MRI: utility for differentiating non-cancerous prostate from prostate cancer and differentiating prostate cancers with different Gleason scores.

Authors:  Andreas Wibmer; Hedvig Hricak; Tatsuo Gondo; Kazuhiro Matsumoto; Harini Veeraraghavan; Duc Fehr; Junting Zheng; Debra Goldman; Chaya Moskowitz; Samson W Fine; Victor E Reuter; James Eastham; Evis Sala; Hebert Alberto Vargas
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-05-21       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  PROSTATEx Challenges for computerized classification of prostate lesions from multiparametric magnetic resonance images.

Authors:  Samuel G Armato; Henkjan Huisman; Karen Drukker; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Justin S Kirby; Nicholas Petrick; George Redmond; Maryellen L Giger; Kenny Cha; Artem Mamonov; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Keyvan Farahani
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2018-11-10

7.  Diagnostic value of semi-quantitative and quantitative analysis of functional parameters in multiparametric MRI of the prostate.

Authors:  Elke Hauth; Daniela Halbritter; Horst Jaeger; Horst Hohmuth; Meinrad Beer
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-07-27       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Assessing Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness with Hyperpolarized Dual-Agent 3D Dynamic Imaging of Metabolism and Perfusion.

Authors:  Hsin-Yu Chen; Peder E Z Larson; Robert A Bok; Cornelius von Morze; Renuka Sriram; Romelyn Delos Santos; Justin Delos Santos; Jeremy W Gordon; Naeim Bahrami; Marcus Ferrone; John Kurhanewicz; Daniel B Vigneron
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2017-04-20       Impact factor: 12.701

Review 9.  Restriction spectrum imaging: An evolving imaging biomarker in prostate MRI.

Authors:  Ryan L Brunsing; Natalie M Schenker-Ahmed; Nathan S White; J Kellogg Parsons; Christopher Kane; Joshua Kuperman; Hauke Bartsch; Andrew Karim Kader; Rebecca Rakow-Penner; Tyler M Seibert; Daniel Margolis; Steven S Raman; Carrie R McDonald; Nikdokht Farid; Santosh Kesari; Donna Hansel; Ahmed Shabaik; Anders M Dale; David S Karow
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-08-16       Impact factor: 4.813

10.  Automatic classification of prostate cancer Gleason scores from multiparametric magnetic resonance images.

Authors:  Duc Fehr; Harini Veeraraghavan; Andreas Wibmer; Tatsuo Gondo; Kazuhiro Matsumoto; Herbert Alberto Vargas; Evis Sala; Hedvig Hricak; Joseph O Deasy
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.