Amide proton transfer (APT) magnetic resonance imaging of prostate cancer: comparison with Gleason scores

被引:52
|
作者
Takayama, Yukihisa [1 ]
Nishie, Akihiro [2 ]
Sugimoto, Masaaki [3 ,4 ]
Togao, Osamu [2 ]
Asayama, Yoshiki [2 ]
Ishigami, Kousei [2 ]
Ushijima, Yasuhiro [2 ]
Okamoto, Daisuke [2 ]
Fujita, Nobuhiro [2 ]
Yokomizo, Akira [4 ]
Keupp, Jochen [5 ]
Honda, Hiroshi [2 ]
机构
[1] Kyushu Univ, Grad Sch Med Sci, Dept Radiol Informat & Network, Higashi Ku, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Fukuoka 8128582, Japan
[2] Kyushu Univ, Grad Sch Med Sci, Dept Clin Radiol, Higashi Ku, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Fukuoka 8128582, Japan
[3] Kyushu Univ, Grad Sch Med Sci, Dept Anat Pathol, Higashi Ku, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Fukuoka 8128582, Japan
[4] Kyushu Univ, Grad Sch Med Sci, Dept Urol, Higashi Ku, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Fukuoka 8128582, Japan
[5] Philips Res, Roentgenstr 24-26, D-22335 Hamburg, Germany
关键词
Amide proton transfer; Apparent diffusion coefficient values; Prostate cancer; Gleason score; APPARENT DIFFUSION-COEFFICIENT; 3; T; RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; HISTOGRAM ANALYSIS; HISTOLOGIC GRADE; AGGRESSIVENESS; VALUES; PARAMETERS; CARCINOMA; ADC;
D O I
10.1007/s10334-016-0537-4
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
To evaluate the utility of amide proton transfer (APT) imaging in estimating the Gleason score (GS) of prostate cancer (Pca). Sixty-six biopsy-proven cancers were categorized into four groups according to the GS: GS-6 (3 + 3); GS-7 (3 + 4/4 + 3); GS-8 (4 + 4) and GS-9 (4 + 5/5 + 4). APT signal intensities (APT SIs) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of each GS group were compared by one-way analysis of variance with Tukey's HSD post hoc test. The mean and standard deviation of the APT SIs (%) and ADC values (x10(-3) mm(2)/s) were as follows: GS-6, 2.48 +/- 0.59 and 1.16 +/- 0.26; GS-7, 5.17 +/- 0.66 and 0.92 +/- 0.18; GS-8, 2.56 +/- 0.85 and 0.86 +/- 0.17; GS-9, 1.96 +/- 0.75 and 0.85 +/- 0.18, respectively. The APT SI of the GS-7 group was highest, and there were significant differences between the GS-6 and GS-7 groups and the GS-7 and GS-9 groups (p < 0.05). The ADC value of the GS-6 group was significantly higher than each value of the GS-7, GS-8, and GS-9 groups (p < 0.05), but no significant differences were obtained among the GS-7, GS-8, and GS-9 groups. The mean APT SI in Pca with a GS of 7 was higher than that for the other GS groups.
引用
收藏
页码:671 / 679
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Multimodality Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Prostate Cancer
    Engelbrecht, Marc R.
    Puech, Philippe
    Colin, Pierre
    Akin, Oguz
    Lemaitre, Laurent
    Villers, Arnauld
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2010, 24 (05) : 677 - 684
  • [32] Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer
    Seitz, Michael
    Shukla-Dave, Amita
    Bjartell, Anders
    Touijer, Karim
    Sciarra, Alessandro
    Bastian, Patrick J.
    Stief, Christian
    Hricak, Hedvig
    Graser, Anno
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2009, 55 (04) : 801 - 814
  • [33] Comparison of Gleason Scores in Specimens of Transrectal Prostate Needle Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy
    Tuygun, Can
    Demirel, Fuat
    Yigitbasi, Orhan
    Bozkurt, Halil
    Bakirtas, Hasan
    Imamoglu, Abdurrahim
    UHOD-ULUSLARARASI HEMATOLOJI-ONKOLOJI DERGISI, 2009, 19 (03): : 129 - 133
  • [34] 3-Tesla amide proton transfer-weighted imaging (APT-WI): elevated signal also in tumor mimics
    Hamon, Guillaume
    Lecler, Augustin
    Ferre, Jean-Christophe
    Bourdillon, Pierre
    Duron, Loic
    Savatovsky, Julien
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2024,
  • [35] Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Management Current Status and Future Perspectives
    Scheenen, Tom W. J.
    Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
    Haider, Masoom A.
    Futterer, Jurgen J.
    INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2015, 50 (09) : 594 - 600
  • [36] Accuracy of 3-Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Staging of Prostate Cancer in Comparison to the Partin Tables
    Augustin, H.
    Fritz, G. A.
    Ehammer, T.
    Auprich, M.
    Pummer, K.
    ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 2009, 50 (05) : 562 - 569
  • [37] Prostate cancer detection rate and Gleason score in relation to prostate volume as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging cognitive biopsy and standard biopsy
    Nepal, Sat Prasad
    Nakasato, Takehiko
    Ogawa, Yoshio
    Naoe, Michio
    Shichijo, Takeshi
    Maeda, Yoshiko
    Morita, Jun
    Oshinomi, Kazuhiko
    Unoki, Tsutomu
    Inoue, Tatsuki
    Kato, Ryosuke
    Omizu, Madoka
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 46 (06): : 449 - 454
  • [38] Evaluation of Brain Tumors Using Amide Proton Transfer Imaging: A Comparison of Normal Amide Proton Transfer Signal With Abnormal Amide Proton Transfer Signal Value
    Sugawara, Kazuaki
    Miyati, Tosiaki
    Wakabayashi, Hikaru
    Yoshimaru, Daisuke
    Komatsu, Shuhei
    Hagiwara, Kazuchika
    Saigusa, Kuniyasu
    Ohno, Naoki
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY, 2023, 47 (01) : 121 - 128
  • [39] Magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging of prostate cancer
    Huzjan, R
    Sala, E
    Hricak, H
    NATURE CLINICAL PRACTICE UROLOGY, 2005, 2 (09): : 434 - 442
  • [40] Prostate cancer: Gleason scores correlation between biopsies and surgical gross specimen
    Peko, J-F.
    Odzebe, A. W. S.
    Nsonde-Malanda, J.
    Bambara, A. T.
    Ngolet, A.
    PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2011, 21 (09): : 615 - 618