• Clinical Article •
Comparison of apparent diffusion coefficient and intravoxel incoherent motion imaging in stratification of prostate cancer: based on three-dimensional whole-tumor histogram analysis
DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2017.09.005.
| [Abstract] Objective: To investigate the three-dimensional whole-tumor histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) and IVIM-DWI in discriminating the Gleason grades of prostate cancer.Materials and Methods: A total of 57 patients with prostate cancer (PCa) underwent MRI before radical prostatectomy. DWI was acquired at 3.0 T using a single-shot echo-planar imaging sequence with 14 b values (0—1500 s/mm2). A volume of interest was drawn manually around every tumor visible on the images. The 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th, mean, min, kurtosis, skewness of ADC, D, D* and f were determined from a histogram that contained all voxels from all sections covering the entire tumor and correlated with the Gleason score (GS) by using the Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ). The patients were divided into GS≤3+4 and GS≥4+3 groups. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to evaluate the ability of each parameter to differentiate the two groups.Results: GS≤3+4 in 23 cases (40.35%) and GS≥4+3 in 34 cases (59.65%). The 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th of ADC and D show a negative correlation with GS (ρ=-0.239—-0.411, P<0.05), and ρ values increased in turn. All above metrics were significantly different between two groups (P<0.05). The 90th ADC, 90th D show higher AUC (0.735 and 0.739, respectively) than mean ADC and mean D (0.719 and 0.698, respectively, P>0.05) in differentiating GS≤3+4 from GS≥4+3. There was no statistically significant difference between any two AUC values of ADC and D histogram metrics. The kurtosis of ADC and D were positively correlated with GS (ρ=0.357, P=0.006; ρ=0.350, P=0.008), but skewness had no correlation with GS. D* and f had no statistically significant correlation with GS either. The volume of whole-tumor lesion was positively correlated with GS (ρ=0.419, P=0.001), and showed a higher discriminatory performance (AUC=0.783) than ADC and D in differentiating GS≤3+4 from GS≥4+3.Conclusions: The histogram parameters of ADC and D had similar performance for prostate cancer stratification. D* and f were unable to distinguish between the different Gleason grades. Tumor volume may be a good predictor of PCa aggressiveness. |
| [Keywords] Prostatic neoplasms；Neoplasm grading；Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging |
ZHANG Pei-pei Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China
WANG Liang* Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China
MIN Xiang-de Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China
FENG Zhao-yan Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China
KANG Zhen Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China
LI Ba-sen Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China
KE Zan Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China
YOU Hui-juan Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China
*Correspondence to: Wang L, E-mail: wangliang_2001@yahoo.com
Conflicts of interest None.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This study was funded by the grant from National Natural Science Foundation of China No. 81171307, 81671656 |
| Received 2017-04-19 |
| Accepted 2017-08-06 |
| DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2017.09.005 |
| DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2017.09.005. |
[1]
Pesapane F, Patella F, Fumarola EM, et al. Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) diffusion weighted Imaging (DWI) in the perifericprostate cancer detection and stratification. Med Oncol, 2017, 34(3): 35.
[2]
Peng Y, Jiang Y, Yang C, et al. Quantitative analysis of multiparametric prostate MR images: differentiation between prostate cancer and normal tissue and correlationwith Gleason score: a computer-aided diagnosis development study. Radiology, 2013,267(3): 787-796.
[3]
Cooperberg MR, Pasta DJ, Elkin EP, et al. The university of california, san francisco cancer of the prostate risk assessment score: a straightforward and reliable preoperative predictor ofdisease recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol, 2005, 173(6): 1938-1942.
[4]
Merisaari H, Jambor I. Optimization of b-value distribution for four mathematical models of prostate cancer diffusion-weighted imaging using b values up to 2000 s/mm (2): simulation and repeatability study. Magn Reson Med, 2015, 73(5): 1954-1969.
[5]
Donati OF, Mazaheri Y, Afaq A, et al. Prostate cancer aggressiveness: assessment with whole-lesion histogramanalysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient. Radiology, 2014, 271(1): 143-152.
[6]
Kobus T, Vos PC, Hambrock T, et al. Prostate cancer aggressiveness: in vivo assessment of MR spectroscopy and diffusion-weighted imaging at 3 T. Radiology, 2012, 265(2): 457-467.
[7]
Hambrock T, Somford DM, Huisman HJ, et al. Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostatecancer. Radiology, 2011, 259(2):453-461.
[8]
Zhang YD, Wang Q, Wu CJ, et al. Thehistogram analysis of diffusion-weighted intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) imaging for differentiating the gleason grade of prostate cancer. Eur Radiol, 2015, 25(4): 994-1004.
[9]
Wu CJ, Wang Q, Li H, et al. DWI-associatedentire-tumor histogram analysis for the differentiation of low-grade prostatecancer fromintermediate-high-gradeprostate cancer. Abdom Imaging, 2015, 40(8): 3214-3221.
[10]
张冬，吴婷，史长征,等.正常前列腺组织IVIM-DWI的可重现性研究及年龄相关性分析.磁共振成像, 2015, 6(11): 848-854.
[11]
Toivonen J, Merisaari H, Pesola M, et al. Mathematical models for diffusion-weighted imaging of prostatecancer using b values up to 2000 s/mm (2): correlation with Gleason score andrepeatability of region of interest analysis. Magn Reson Med, 2015, 74(4):1116-1124.
[12]
Vargas HA, Akin O, Franiel T, et al. Diffusion-weighted endorectal MR imaging at 3 T for prostate cancer:tumor detection and assessment of aggressiveness. Radiology, 2011, 259(3): 775-784.
[13]
Valerio M, Zini C, Fierro D, et al. 3 T multiparametric MRI of the prostate: Does intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion imaging have a role in the detection and stratification of prostate cancer in the peripheral zone? Eur J Radiol, 2016, 85(4): 790-794.
[14]
万红燕，毕芸祺，衣岩,等.基于体素内不相干运动的MR扩散加权成像对前列腺癌诊断价值的初步研究.磁共振成像, 2015, 6(6):445-449.
[15]
武文奇，牛金亮.基于体素内不相干运动的扩散加权成像在肿瘤诊断中的研究进展.中华放射学杂志, 2016, 50(7): 553-555.
[16]
闵祥德，王良，冯朝燕,等.高分辨率扩散加权成像表观扩散系数与前列腺癌Gleason评分的相关性.中华放射学杂志, 2015, 49(3):191-194.
[17]
Turkbey B, Shah VP, Pang Y, et al. Isapparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images? Radiology, 2011, 258(2): 488-495.
