Literature DB >> 28096922

Relationship between Gleason score and apparent diffusion coefficients of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer patients.

Tae Heon Kim1, Chan Kyo Kim2, Byung Kwan Park2, Hwang Gyun Jeon3, Byung Chang Jeong3, Seong Il Seo3, Hyun Moo Lee3, Han Yong Choi3, Seong Soo Jeon3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: We assessed the correlation between the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and pathological Gleason score (GS) of prostate cancer patients.
METHODS: A total of 125 patients who underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging before radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer were included in this study. ADC values were compared with different GS. We used receiver operating characteristic analysis and determined the ADC cutoff value to differentiate tumours with a GS of 6 from those with a GS ≥7.
RESULTS: We identified 34 patients (27.2%) with a GS of 6; 33 patients (26.4%) with a GS of 7; 22 patients (17.6%) with a GS of 8; and 36 patients (28.8%) with a GS of ≥9. The mean ADC value for disease with a GS of 6 was 0.914 ± 0.161 ×10-3 mm2/s; GS of 7: 0.741 ± 0.164 ×10-3 mm2/s; GS of 8: 0.679 ± 0.130 ×10-3 mm2/s; and GS of ≥9: 0.593 ± 0.089 ×10-3 mm2/s. An ADC value of 0.830 ×10-3mm2/s was the best cutoff value to identify prostate cancer with a GS of 6.
CONCLUSIONS: We observed an inverse relationship between GS and ADC value. Moreover, a cutoff ADC value may help differentiate disease with a GS of 6 from disease with a GS ≥7.

Entities:  

Year:  2016        PMID: 28096922      PMCID: PMC5234404          DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.3896

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J        ISSN: 1911-6470            Impact factor:   1.862


  28 in total

1.  Prediction of biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy in men with prostate cancer by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: initial results.

Authors:  Sung Yoon Park; Chan Kyo Kim; Byung Kwan Park; Hyun Moo Lee; Kyung Soo Lee
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-11-03       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer.

Authors:  James Thompson; Nathan Lawrentschuk; Mark Frydenberg; Les Thompson; Phillip Stricker
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  Gleason score 6 adenocarcinoma: should it be labeled as cancer?

Authors:  H Ballentine Carter; Alan W Partin; Patrick C Walsh; Bruce J Trock; Robert W Veltri; William G Nelson; Donald S Coffey; Eric A Singer; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease.

Authors:  Axel Heidenreich; Joaquim Bellmunt; Michel Bolla; Steven Joniau; Malcolm Mason; Vsevolod Matveev; Nicolas Mottet; Hans-Peter Schmid; Theo van der Kwast; Thomas Wiegel; Filliberto Zattoni
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 20.096

5.  Detectability of low and intermediate or high risk prostate cancer with combined T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted MRI.

Authors:  Kyung Won Doo; Deuk Jae Sung; Beom Jin Park; Min Ju Kim; Sung Bum Cho; Yu Whan Oh; Young Hwii Ko; Kyung Sook Yang
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-04-01       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer.

Authors:  Thomas Hambrock; Diederik M Somford; Henkjan J Huisman; Inge M van Oort; J Alfred Witjes; Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Thomas Scheenen; Jelle O Barentsz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Assessment of morphometric measurements of prostate carcinoma volume.

Authors:  M Noguchi; T A Stamey; J E McNeal; C E Yemoto
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012.

Authors:  J Ferlay; E Steliarova-Foucher; J Lortet-Tieulent; S Rosso; J W W Coebergh; H Comber; D Forman; F Bray
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2013-02-26       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 9.  Risk of Gleason grade inaccuracies in prostate cancer patients eligible for active surveillance.

Authors:  Ronald H Shapiro; Peter A S Johnstone
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Can diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging predict a high Gleason score of prostate cancer?

Authors:  Katsumi Shigemura; Nozomu Yamanaka; Masuo Yamashita
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2013-04-16
View more
  4 in total

1.  Multiparametric MRI Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) Accuracy in Diagnosing Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Pietro Pepe; Davide D'Urso; Antonio Garufi; Giandomenico Priolo; Michele Pennisi; Giorgio Russo; Maria Gabriella Sabini; Lucia Maria Valastro; Antonio Galia; Filippo Fraggetta
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2017 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.155

2.  Fully automated detection and localization of clinically significant prostate cancer on MR images using a cascaded convolutional neural network.

Authors:  Lina Zhu; Ge Gao; Yi Zhu; Chao Han; Xiang Liu; Derun Li; Weipeng Liu; Xiangpeng Wang; Jingyuan Zhang; Xiaodong Zhang; Xiaoying Wang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 5.738

3.  Segmentation of the prostate, its zones, anterior fibromuscular stroma, and urethra on the MRIs and multimodality image fusion using U-Net model.

Authors:  Seyed Masoud Rezaeijo; Shabnam Jafarpoor Nesheli; Mehdi Fatan Serj; Mohammad Javad Tahmasebi Birgani
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2022-10

4.  Synthetic Apparent Diffusion Coefficient for High b-Value Diffusion-Weighted MRI in Prostate.

Authors:  Prativa Sahoo; Russell C Rockne; Alexander Jung; Pradeep K Gupta; Ram K S Rathore; Rakesh K Gupta
Journal:  Prostate Cancer       Date:  2020-02-10
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.