Literature DB >> 34882269

Longitudinal evaluation of apparent diffusion coefficient values as a predictor of Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance reclassification.

Eri Ota1, Naoko Mori2, Shinichi Yamashita3, Shunji Mugikura1,4, Akihiro Ito3, Kei Takase1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) parameters in distinguishing between Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) non-reclassification and reclassification groups during active surveillance (AS) of prostate cancer.
METHODS: We included 55 patients who fulfilled the PRIAS criteria and underwent ≥ 2 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) including diffusion-weighted imaging with an interval of ≤ 3 years between baseline and second MRI. A mono-exponential fitting model was used to automatically create ADC maps with minimum b-values of 0 and maximum of 2000 s/mm2. For detectable lesions on ADC maps, the lesions were manually segmented on each slice of the ADC maps. For undetectable lesions, the corresponding normal-appearing zone of the lobe on each slice of ADC maps was segmented. The ADC data for each slice were summed to obtain the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile ADC values of the histogram at baseline and second MRI. These ADC parameters at baseline and second MRI, and the changes of ADC parameters from baseline to second MRI were compared between PRIAS non-reclassification and reclassification groups.
RESULTS: The PRIAS reclassification group had significantly lower 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile ADC values at second MRI compared to the non-reclassification group. The non-reclassification group had significantly lower changes in ADC values in these percentiles compared to the reclassification group.
CONCLUSION: The ADC parameters at second MRI and the changes from baseline to second MRI may be effective distinguishing factors between PRIAS non-reclassification and reclassification groups.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Active surveillance; Apparent diffusion coefficient; Diffusion-weighted imaging; Prostate cancer; Reclassification

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34882269     DOI: 10.1007/s00261-021-03372-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)


  17 in total

1.  Prospective validation of active surveillance in prostate cancer: the PRIAS study.

Authors:  Roderick C N van den Bergh; Stijn Roemeling; Monique J Roobol; Wouter Roobol; Fritz H Schröder; Chris H Bangma
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2007-05-25       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 2.  Serum and urinary biomarkers for detection and active surveillance of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Maria F Becerra; Abhishek Bhat; Ali Mouzannar; Venkatasai S Atluri; Sanoj Punnen
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 2.309

Review 3.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: current evidence and contemporary state of practice.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Tosoian; H Ballentine Carter; Abbey Lepor; Stacy Loeb
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2016-03-08       Impact factor: 14.432

4.  Update on Multiparametric Prostate MRI During Active Surveillance: Current and Future Trends and Role of the PRECISE Recommendations.

Authors:  Francesco Giganti; Alex Kirkham; Clare Allen; Shonit Punwani; Clément Orczyk; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  A study of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in men with untreated localised prostate cancer on active surveillance.

Authors:  Nicholas J van As; Nandita M de Souza; Sophie F Riches; Veronica A Morgan; Sayid A Sohaib; David P Dearnaley; Chris C Parker
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2008-12-06       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  The outcome of prostate cancer screening in a normal Japanese population with PSA of 2-4 ng/ml and the free/total PSA under 12%.

Authors:  Shigeto Ishidoya; Akihiro Ito; Kazuhiko Orikasa; Sadafumi Kawamura; Tatsuo Tochigi; Masaaki Kuwahara; Takuya Yamanobe; Yoshihiko Tomita; Naoya Masumori; Taiji Tsukamoto; Daisuke Shibuya; Yoichi Arai
Journal:  Jpn J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-10-21       Impact factor: 3.019

7.  Four-year outcomes from a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based active surveillance programme: PSA dynamics and serial MRI scans allow omission of protocol biopsies.

Authors:  Kevin Michael Gallagher; Edward Christopher; Andrew James Cameron; Scott Little; Alasdair Innes; Gill Davis; Julian Keanie; Prasad Bollina; Alan McNeill
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2018-10-09       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Evaluation of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient as a Predictor of Grade Reclassification in Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Mitchell M Huang; Katarzyna J Macura; Patricia Landis; Jonathan I Epstein; Rakhee Gawande; H Ballentine Carter; Mufaddal Mamawala
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2020-01-15       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 9.  Active Surveillance in Prostate Cancer: Role of Available Biomarkers in Daily Practice.

Authors:  Belén Pastor-Navarro; José Rubio-Briones; Ángel Borque-Fernando; Luis M Esteban; Jose Luis Dominguez-Escrig; José Antonio López-Guerrero
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 5.923

10.  Reporting Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: The PRECISE Recommendations-A Report of a European School of Oncology Task Force.

Authors:  Caroline M Moore; Francesco Giganti; Peter Albertsen; Clare Allen; Chris Bangma; Alberto Briganti; Peter Carroll; Masoom Haider; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Alex Kirkham; Laurence Klotz; Adil Ouzzane; Anwar R Padhani; Valeria Panebianco; Peter Pinto; Philippe Puech; Antti Rannikko; Raphaele Renard-Penna; Karim Touijer; Baris Turkbey; Heinrik van Poppel; Riccardo Valdagni; Jochen Walz; Ivo Schoots
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2016-06-24       Impact factor: 20.096

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.