Lei Hu1, Da Wei Zhou2, Cai Xia Fu3, Thomas Benkert4, Chun Yu Jiang1, Rui Ting Li1, Li Ming Wei1, Jun Gong Zhao5. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, No. 600, Yi Shan Road, Shanghai, 200233, China. 2. State Key Laboratory of Integrated Services Networks, School of Telecommunications Engineering, Xidian University, 2 South Taibai Road, Xi'an, 710071, Shaanxi, China. 3. MR Application Development, Siemens Shenzhen Magnetic Resonance Ltd., Shenzhen, China. 4. MR Application Predevelopment, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany. 5. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, No. 600, Yi Shan Road, Shanghai, 200233, China. zhaojungongradio@hotmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the efficiency of prostate cancer (PCa) detection using a radiomics signature based on advanced zoomed diffusion-weighted imaging and conventional full-field-of-view DWI. METHODS: A total of 136 patients, including 73 patients with PCa and 63 without PCa, underwent multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI). Radiomic features were extracted from prostate lesion areas segmented on full-field-of-view DWI with b-value = 1500 s/mm2 (f-DWIb1500), advanced zoomed DWI images with b-value = 1500 s/mm2 (z-DWIb1500), calculated zoomed DWI with b-value = 2000 s/mm2 (z-calDWIb2000), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps derived from both sequences (f-ADC and z-ADC). Single-imaging modality radiomics signature, mp-MRI radiomics signature, and a mixed model based on mp-MRI and clinically independent risk factors were built to predict PCa probability. The diagnostic efficacy and the potential net benefits of each model were evaluated. RESULTS: Both z-DWIb1500 and z-calDWIb2000 had significantly better predictive performance than f-DWIb1500 (z-DWIb1500 vs. f-DWIb1500: p = 0.048; z-calDWIb2000 vs. f-DWIb1500: p = 0.014). z-ADC had a slightly higher area under the curve (AUC) value compared with f-ADC value but was not significantly different (p = 0.127). For predicting the presence of PCa, the AUCs of clinical independent risk factors model, mp-MRI model, and mixed model were 0.81, 0.93, and 0.94 in training sets, and 0.74, 0.92, and 0.93 in validation sets, respectively. CONCLUSION: Radiomics signatures based on the z-DWI technology had better diagnostic accuracy for PCa than that based on the f-DWI technology. The mixed model was better at diagnosing PCa and guiding clinical interventions for patients with suspected PCa compared with mp-MRI signatures and clinically independent risk factors. KEY POINTS: • Advanced zoomed DWI technology can improve the diagnostic accuracy of radiomics signatures for PCa. • Radiomics signatures based on z-calDWIb2000 have the best diagnostic performance among individual imaging modalities. • Compared with the independent clinical risk factors and the mp-MRI model, the mixed model has the best diagnostic efficiency.
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the efficiency of prostate cancer (PCa) detection using a radiomics signature based on advanced zoomed diffusion-weighted imaging and conventional full-field-of-view DWI. METHODS: A total of 136 patients, including 73 patients with PCa and 63 without PCa, underwent multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI). Radiomic features were extracted from prostate lesion areas segmented on full-field-of-view DWI with b-value = 1500 s/mm2 (f-DWIb1500), advanced zoomed DWI images with b-value = 1500 s/mm2 (z-DWIb1500), calculated zoomed DWI with b-value = 2000 s/mm2 (z-calDWIb2000), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps derived from both sequences (f-ADC and z-ADC). Single-imaging modality radiomics signature, mp-MRI radiomics signature, and a mixed model based on mp-MRI and clinically independent risk factors were built to predict PCa probability. The diagnostic efficacy and the potential net benefits of each model were evaluated. RESULTS: Both z-DWIb1500 and z-calDWIb2000 had significantly better predictive performance than f-DWIb1500 (z-DWIb1500 vs. f-DWIb1500: p = 0.048; z-calDWIb2000 vs. f-DWIb1500: p = 0.014). z-ADC had a slightly higher area under the curve (AUC) value compared with f-ADC value but was not significantly different (p = 0.127). For predicting the presence of PCa, the AUCs of clinical independent risk factors model, mp-MRI model, and mixed model were 0.81, 0.93, and 0.94 in training sets, and 0.74, 0.92, and 0.93 in validation sets, respectively. CONCLUSION: Radiomics signatures based on the z-DWI technology had better diagnostic accuracy for PCa than that based on the f-DWI technology. The mixed model was better at diagnosing PCa and guiding clinical interventions for patients with suspected PCa compared with mp-MRI signatures and clinically independent risk factors. KEY POINTS: • Advanced zoomed DWI technology can improve the diagnostic accuracy of radiomics signatures for PCa. • Radiomics signatures based on z-calDWIb2000 have the best diagnostic performance among individual imaging modalities. • Compared with the independent clinical risk factors and the mp-MRI model, the mixed model has the best diagnostic efficiency.
Entities:
Keywords:
Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging; Logistic models; Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging; Prostate cancer; Radiomics
Authors: Lei Hu; Da Wei Zhou; Cai Xia Fu; Thomas Benkert; Yun Feng Xiao; Li Ming Wei; Jun Gong Zhao Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-09-09 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Matteo Ferro; Ottavio de Cobelli; Gennaro Musi; Francesco Del Giudice; Giuseppe Carrieri; Gian Maria Busetto; Ugo Giovanni Falagario; Alessandro Sciarra; Martina Maggi; Felice Crocetto; Biagio Barone; Vincenzo Francesco Caputo; Michele Marchioni; Giuseppe Lucarelli; Ciro Imbimbo; Francesco Alessandro Mistretta; Stefano Luzzago; Mihai Dorin Vartolomei; Luigi Cormio; Riccardo Autorino; Octavian Sabin Tătaru Journal: Ther Adv Urol Date: 2022-07-04
Authors: Simon K B Spohn; Alisa S Bettermann; Fabian Bamberg; Matthias Benndorf; Michael Mix; Nils H Nicolay; Tobias Fechter; Tobias Hölscher; Radu Grosu; Arturo Chiti; Anca L Grosu; Constantinos Zamboglou Journal: Theranostics Date: 2021-07-06 Impact factor: 11.556