Sungmin Woo1, Sang Youn Kim1, Jeong Yeon Cho1,2, Seung Hyup Kim1,2. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul 110-744, Korea. 2. 2 Institute of Radiation Medicine and Kidney Research Institute, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and various ADC ratios in determining aggressiveness of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-five patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer underwent 3-T MRI followed by radical prostatectomy. ADC and ADC ratios were calculated using the peripheral zone, transition zone, same zone as the tumor, and urinary bladder as references. ADC and ADC ratios were correlated with Gleason score using the Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ) and were compared between low-grade (Gleason score = 6) and high-grade (Gleason score ≥ 7) prostate cancer using the unpaired t test. ROC curves were used to compare diagnostic accuracies of ADC and ADC ratios in determining high-grade prostate cancer. RESULTS: Fifty-six (33.9%) and 109 (66.1%) patients had low- and high-grade prostate cancer, respectively. ADC (ρ = -0.476) and all ADC ratios (ρ = -0.397, -0.412, -0.381, and -0.474, respectively) correlated significantly with Gleason score (p < 0.001) and were significantly lower in patients with high-grade prostate cancer (p < 0.001). For predicting high-grade prostate cancer, tumor ADC and tumor-to-urinary bladder ADC ratio showed the highest AUC (0.794 and 0.790, respectively) but without statistically significant difference (p = 0.803). AUC of tumor ADC (0.794) was statistically significantly higher than those of the tumor-to-peripheral zone and tumor-to-transition zone ADC ratios (0.746, p = 0.039; 0.751, p = 0.027; respectively). AUC of tumor ADC was not statistically significantly higher than that of the tumor-to-tumor zone ADC ratio (0.763, p = 0.193). AUC calculated using the tumor-to-urinary bladder ADC ratio was statistically significantly higher than that using the tumor-to-transition zone ADC ratio (p = 0.028) and marginally higher than that from tumor-to-peripheral zone ADC ratio (p = 0.080). Otherwise, no significant differences were seen in the AUCs (p = 0.193-0.828). CONCLUSION: Both ADC and various ADC ratios correlated significantly with Gleason score and were significant predictors of high-grade prostate cancer. However, no benefit was found in using ADC ratio over ADC.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and various ADC ratios in determining aggressiveness of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-five patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer underwent 3-T MRI followed by radical prostatectomy. ADC and ADC ratios were calculated using the peripheral zone, transition zone, same zone as the tumor, and urinary bladder as references. ADC and ADC ratios were correlated with Gleason score using the Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ) and were compared between low-grade (Gleason score = 6) and high-grade (Gleason score ≥ 7) prostate cancer using the unpaired t test. ROC curves were used to compare diagnostic accuracies of ADC and ADC ratios in determining high-grade prostate cancer. RESULTS: Fifty-six (33.9%) and 109 (66.1%) patients had low- and high-grade prostate cancer, respectively. ADC (ρ = -0.476) and all ADC ratios (ρ = -0.397, -0.412, -0.381, and -0.474, respectively) correlated significantly with Gleason score (p < 0.001) and were significantly lower in patients with high-grade prostate cancer (p < 0.001). For predicting high-grade prostate cancer, tumor ADC and tumor-to-urinary bladder ADC ratio showed the highest AUC (0.794 and 0.790, respectively) but without statistically significant difference (p = 0.803). AUC of tumor ADC (0.794) was statistically significantly higher than those of the tumor-to-peripheral zone and tumor-to-transition zone ADC ratios (0.746, p = 0.039; 0.751, p = 0.027; respectively). AUC of tumor ADC was not statistically significantly higher than that of the tumor-to-tumor zone ADC ratio (0.763, p = 0.193). AUC calculated using the tumor-to-urinary bladder ADC ratio was statistically significantly higher than that using the tumor-to-transition zone ADC ratio (p = 0.028) and marginally higher than that from tumor-to-peripheral zone ADC ratio (p = 0.080). Otherwise, no significant differences were seen in the AUCs (p = 0.193-0.828). CONCLUSION: Both ADC and various ADC ratios correlated significantly with Gleason score and were significant predictors of high-grade prostate cancer. However, no benefit was found in using ADC ratio over ADC.
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
Authors: Elmira Hassanzadeh; Francesco Alessandrino; Olutayo I Olubiyi; Daniel I Glazer; Robert V Mulkern; Andriy Fedorov; Clare M Tempany; Fiona M Fennessy Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2018-05
Authors: Ely R Felker; Steven S Raman; Daniel J Margolis; David S K Lu; Nicholas Shaheen; Shyam Natarajan; Devi Sharma; Jiaoti Huang; Fred Dorey; Leonard S Marks Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Elias Nerad; Andrea Delli Pizzi; Doenja M J Lambregts; Monique Maas; Sharan Wadhwani; Frans C H Bakers; Harrie C M van den Bosch; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Max J Lahaye Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-02-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Björn J Langbein; Filip Szczepankiewicz; Carl-Fredrik Westin; Camden Bay; Stephan E Maier; Adam S Kibel; Clare M Tempany; Fiona M Fennessy Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 6.016