The utility of apparent diffusion coefficient values in the risk stratification of prostate cancer using a 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging without endorectal coil
João Lopes Dias , João Magalhães Pina , Nuno Vasco Costa , Sandra Carmo , Cecília Leal , Tiago Bilhim , Rui Mateus Marques , Luís Campos Pinheiro
{"title":"The utility of apparent diffusion coefficient values in the risk stratification of prostate cancer using a 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging without endorectal coil","authors":"João Lopes Dias , João Magalhães Pina , Nuno Vasco Costa , Sandra Carmo , Cecília Leal , Tiago Bilhim , Rui Mateus Marques , Luís Campos Pinheiro","doi":"10.1016/j.acup.2016.06.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To evaluate the relationship between mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and post-surgical Gleason scores. To determine the diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) on a 1.5<!--> <!-->T magnet in distinguishing low, intermediate and high-grade prostate tumors.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>This is a retrospective institutional-review-board-approved, single-center study including 30 patients (median age, 60 years) who underwent mp-MRI before prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Using histological reports for guidance, the tumors were localized in ADC maps, and mean ADCs were measured and examined for correlation with Gleason scores. 2 patients had 2 measurable foci, so a total of 32 tumors were studied. The diagnostic accuracy of the mean ADC was assessed by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In the differentiation of tumors with a Gleason score of 6 from those with a Gleason score of at least 7, mean ADC yielded an AUC of 0.76 (95% confidence interval: 0.59, 0.93). In the differentiation of tumors with Gleason scores of 6 or 7 from those with a Gleason score of at least 8, mean ADC yielded an AUC of 0.94 (95% confidence interval: 0.86, 1.00).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Mean ADC values may allow a correct assessment of the patient risk using a 1.5<!--> <!-->T magnet without ERC.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100020,"journal":{"name":"Acta Urológica Portuguesa","volume":"33 3","pages":"Pages 81-86"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.acup.2016.06.002","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Urológica Portuguesa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2341402216300210","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Purpose
To evaluate the relationship between mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and post-surgical Gleason scores. To determine the diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) on a 1.5 T magnet in distinguishing low, intermediate and high-grade prostate tumors.
Material and methods
This is a retrospective institutional-review-board-approved, single-center study including 30 patients (median age, 60 years) who underwent mp-MRI before prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Using histological reports for guidance, the tumors were localized in ADC maps, and mean ADCs were measured and examined for correlation with Gleason scores. 2 patients had 2 measurable foci, so a total of 32 tumors were studied. The diagnostic accuracy of the mean ADC was assessed by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC).
Results
In the differentiation of tumors with a Gleason score of 6 from those with a Gleason score of at least 7, mean ADC yielded an AUC of 0.76 (95% confidence interval: 0.59, 0.93). In the differentiation of tumors with Gleason scores of 6 or 7 from those with a Gleason score of at least 8, mean ADC yielded an AUC of 0.94 (95% confidence interval: 0.86, 1.00).
Conclusion
Mean ADC values may allow a correct assessment of the patient risk using a 1.5 T magnet without ERC.