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

被引:66
|
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 50 条
  • [31] What is the Best Method For Evaluating Gleason Score and Tumor Extent for MRI/US Fusion Targeted Biopsy?
    Gordetsky, Jennifer
    Schultz, Luciana
    Porter, Kristin
    Nix, Jeffrey
    Rais-Bahrami, Soroush
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2018, 98 : 346 - 346
  • [32] Comments on 'Tumor apparent diffusion coefficient as an imaging biomarker to predict tumor aggressiveness'
    Xu, Li
    Wang, Rong-Pin
    Zhang, SiWei
    Chen, Zhi-Guang
    NMR IN BIOMEDICINE, 2017, 30 (07)
  • [33] Usefulness of Testicular Volume, Apparent Diffusion Coefficient, and Normalized Apparent Diffusion Coefficient in the MRI Evaluation of Infertile Men With Azoospermia
    Han, Byoung Hee
    Park, Sung Bin
    Seo, Ju Tae
    Chun, Yi Kyeong
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2018, 210 (03) : 543 - 548
  • [34] Short Term Reproducibility in Apparent Diffusion Coefficient for Diffusion Weighted MRI of the Prostate
    Sadinski, M.
    Medved, M.
    Karademir, I.
    Wang, S.
    Peng, Y.
    Jiang, Y.
    Sammet, S.
    Karczmar, G.
    Oto, A.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2013, 40 (06)
  • [35] Risk Stratification of Prostate Cancer Utilizing Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Value and Lesion Volume on Multiparametric MRI
    Salami, Simpa S.
    Ben-Levi, Eran
    Yaskiv, Oksana
    Turkbey, Baris
    Villani, Robert
    Rastinehad, Ardeshir R.
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2017, 45 (02) : 610 - 616
  • [36] USEFULNESS OF APPARENT DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT RATIO BETWEEN TUMOR AND NONTUMOR AS AN IMAGING BIOMARKER FOR PROSTATE CANCER
    Matsuoka, Yoh
    Tanaka, Hiroshi
    Kimura, Tomo
    Moriyama, Shingo
    Uehara, Sho
    Yasuda, Yosuke
    Kijima, Toshiki
    Yoshida, Soichiro
    Yokoyama, Minato
    Ishioka, Junichiro
    Saito, Kazutaka
    Fujii, Yasuhisa
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (04): : E1163 - E1163
  • [37] Dose painting of prostate cancer based on Gleason score correlations with apparent diffusion coefficients
    Gronlund, Eric
    Johansson, Silvia
    Nyholm, Tufve
    Thellenberg, Camilla
    Ahnesjo, Anders
    ACTA ONCOLOGICA, 2018, 57 (05) : 574 - 581
  • [38] Diffusion-weighted MRI in rectal cancer: Apparent diffusion coefficient as a potential noninvasive marker of tumor aggressiveness
    Curvo-Semedo, Luis
    Lambregts, Doenja M. J.
    Maas, Monique
    Beets, Geerard L.
    Caseiro-Alves, Filipe
    Beets-Tan, Regina G. H.
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2012, 35 (06) : 1365 - 1371
  • [39] Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Tumor Visibility on Trace Diffusion-Weighted Images and the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Map
    Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
    Kong, Xiangtian
    Niver, Benjamin E.
    Berkman, Douglas S.
    Melamed, Jonathan
    Babb, James S.
    Taneja, Samir S.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2011, 196 (01) : 123 - 129
  • [40] Diffusion-Weighted Imaging of Prostate Cancer: Correlation Between Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values and Tumor Proliferation
    Wang, Xi Zhen
    Wang, Bin
    Gao, Zhi Qin
    Liu, Jin Gang
    Liu, Zuo Qin
    Niu, Qing Liang
    Sun, Zhen Kui
    Yuan, Yu Xiao
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2009, 29 (06) : 1360 - 1366