Prostate MRI: Evaluating Tumor Volume and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient as Surrogate Biomarkers for Predicting Tumor Gleason Score

被引:67
作者
Donati, Olivio F. [1 ,3 ]
Afaq, Asim [4 ]
Vargas, Hebert Alberto [1 ]
Mazaheri, Yousef [2 ]
Zheng, Junting [2 ]
Moskowitz, Chaya S. [2 ]
Hricak, Hedvig [1 ]
Akin, Oguz [1 ]
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Radiol, New York, NY 10065 USA
[2] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, New York, NY 10065 USA
[3] Univ Zurich Hosp, Inst Diagnost & Intervent Radiol, CH-8091 Zurich, Switzerland
[4] Univ Coll London Hosp, Biomed Res Ctr, Natl Inst Hlth Res, Inst Nucl Med, London, England
基金
瑞士国家科学基金会;
关键词
ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE; CANCER CORRELATION; FIELD-STRENGTH; 3; T; AGGRESSIVENESS; GRADE; ADENOCARCINOMA; DIAGNOSIS; SPREAD;
D O I
10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0044
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: To investigate whether tumor volume derived from apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps (Volume(ADC)) and tumor mean ADC value (ADC(mean)) are independent predictors of prostate tumor Gleason score (GS). Experimental Design: Tumor volume and GS were recorded from whole-mount histopathology for 131 men (median age, 60 years) who underwent endorectal diffusion-weighted MRI for local staging of prostate cancer before prostatectomy. Volume(ADC) and ADC(mean) were derived from ADC maps and correlated with histopathologic tumor volume and GS. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate prediction of tumor aggressiveness. Areas under receiver-operating characteristics curves (AUC) were calculated to evaluate the performance of Volume(ADC) and ADC(mean) in discriminating tumors of GS 6 and GS >= 7. Results: Histopathology identified 116 tumor foci >0.5 mL. Volume(ADC) correlated significantly with histopathologic tumor volume (rho = 0.683). The correlation increased with increasing GS (rho = 0.453 for GS 6 tumors; rho = 0.643 for GS 7 tumors; rho = 0.980 for GS >= 8 tumors). Both Volume(ADC) (rho = 0.286) and ADC(mean) (rho = -0.309) correlated with GS. At univariate analysis, both Volume(ADC) (P = 0.0325) and ADC(mean) (P = 0.0033) could differentiate GS 6 from GS >= 7 tumor foci. However, at multivariate analysis, only ADC(mean) (P = 0.0156) was a significant predictor of tumor aggressiveness (i. e., GS 6 vs. GS >= 7). For differentiating GS 6 from GS >= 7 tumors, AUCs were 0.644 and 0.704 for Volume(ADC) and ADC(mean), respectively, and 0.749 for both parameters combined. Conclusion: In patients with prostate cancer, ADC(mean) is an independent predictor of tumor aggressiveness, but Volume(ADC) is not. The latter parameter adds little to the ADC(mean) in predicting tumor GS. (C)2014 AACR.
引用
收藏
页码:3705 / 3711
页数:7
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   Focal therapy for localised unifocal and multifocal prostate cancer: a prospective development study [J].
Ahmed, Hashim U. ;
Hindley, Richard G. ;
Dickinson, Louise ;
Freeman, Alex ;
Kirkham, Alex P. ;
Sahu, Mahua ;
Scott, Rebecca ;
Allen, Clare ;
Van der Meulen, Jan ;
Emberton, Mark .
LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2012, 13 (06) :622-632
[2]   Transatlantic Consensus Group on active surveillance and focal therapy for prostate cancer [J].
Ahmed, Hashim U. ;
Akin, Oguz ;
Coleman, Jonathan A. ;
Crane, Sarah ;
Emberton, Mark ;
Goldenberg, Larry ;
Hricak, Hedvig ;
Kattan, Mike W. ;
Kurhanewicz, John ;
Moore, Caroline M. ;
Parker, Chris ;
Polascik, Thomas J. ;
Scardino, Peter ;
van As, Nicholas ;
Villers, Arnauld .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2012, 109 (11) :1636-1647
[3]   Do low-grade and low-volume prostate cancers bear the hallmarks of malignancy? [J].
Ahmed, Hashim Uddin ;
Arya, Manit ;
Freeman, Alex ;
Emberton, Mark .
LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2012, 13 (11) :E509-E517
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1997, AJCC CANC STAGING MA
[5]   CALCULATING CORRELATION-COEFFICIENTS WITH REPEATED OBSERVATIONS .2. CORRELATION BETWEEN SUBJECTS [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1995, 310 (6980) :633-633
[6]   Advancements in MR Imaging of the Prostate: From Diagnosis to Interventions [J].
Bonekamp, David ;
Jacobs, Michael A. ;
El-Khouli, Riham ;
Stoianovici, Dan ;
Macura, Katarzyna J. .
RADIOGRAPHICS, 2011, 31 (03) :677-703
[7]   Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: Risk assessment and treatment [J].
Cooperberg, Matthew R. ;
Broering, Jeannette M. ;
Kantoff, Philip W. ;
Carroll, Peter R. .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2007, 178 (03) :S14-S19
[8]   Field Strength and Diffusion Encoding Technique Affect the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Measurements in Diffusion-Weighted Imaging of the Abdomen [J].
Dale, Brian M. ;
Braithwaite, Adam C. ;
Boll, Daniel T. ;
Merkle, Elmar M. .
INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2010, 45 (02) :104-108
[9]   Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness: Assessment with Whole-Lesion Histogram Analysis of the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient [J].
Donati, Olivio F. ;
Mazaheri, Yousef ;
Afaq, Asim ;
Vargas, Hebert A. ;
Zheng, Junting ;
Moskowitz, Chaya S. ;
Hricak, Hedvig ;
Akin, Oguz .
RADIOLOGY, 2014, 271 (01) :143-152
[10]   Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging of Upper Abdominal Organs: Field Strength and Intervendor Variability of Apparent Diffusion Coefficients [J].
Donati, Olivio F. ;
Chong, Daniel ;
Nanz, Daniel ;
Boss, Andreas ;
Froehlich, Johannes M. ;
Andres, Erik ;
Seifert, Burkhardt ;
Thoeny, Harriet C. .
RADIOLOGY, 2014, 270 (02) :454-463