Comparison of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient parameters with prostate imaging reporting and data system V2 assessment for detection of clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer.
Comparison of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient parameters with prostate imaging reporting and data system V2 assessment for detection of clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00261-017-1297-y
复制
发表时间：
2018-05
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Fennessy FM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hassanzadeh E;Alessandrino F;Olubiyi OI;Glazer DI;Mulkern RV;Fedorov A;Tempany CM;Fennessy FM
比较PI-RADSv 2与ADC参数的诊断性能，以识别具有临床意义的前列腺癌（csPC），并确定csPC定义对ADC和PI-RADSv 2诊断性能的影响。我们回顾性确定了2011-2015年期间接受3 T前列腺MRI（使用高b值弥散加权成像）的未经治疗的病理学证实的外周区PC患者。使用3D切片仪，体积地勾画ADC（B= 0，1400）上的疑似肿瘤（T）和正常组织（N）的区域。计算平均ADCT、平均ADCN、ADCratio（ADCT/ADCN）。分配了PI-RADSv 2。使用三种csPC定义：（A）Gleason评分（GS）≥4+3;（B）GS≥3+4;（C）基于MRI的肿瘤体积> 0.5 cc。ADC参数和PI-RADSv 2在识别csPC中的性能通过使用曲线下面积（AUC）的受试者工作特征曲线的非参数比较来测量。85例病例符合资格要求。使用3种定义鉴定csPC的诊断性能（AUC）为：（0.83）高于PI-RADSv 2（0.65，p=0.006）;（B）ADCT（0.86）高于ADC比率（0.68，p<0.001）和PI-RADSv 2（0.70，p=0.04）;（C）PI-RADSv 2（0.73）表现优于ADC比率（0.56，p=0.02）。当csPC定义为A或B时，ADCT性能高于C（分别为p=0.038和p=0.01）。当csPC定义为A时，ADC比表现更好（p=0.01）。PI-RADSv 2性能不受csPC定义的影响。当通过GS定义csPC时，ADC参数提供比PI-RADSv 2更好的csPC区分，其中ADCT提供最佳结果。当通过MRI计算的体积定义csPC时，PI-RADSv 2比ADC ratio提供更好的区分。csPC定义不影响PI-RADSv 2诊断性能。
To compare diagnostic performance of PI-RADSv2 with ADC parameters to identify clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) and to determine the impact of csPC definitions on diagnostic performance of ADC and PI-RADSv2. We retrospectively identified treatment-naïve pathology-proven peripheral zone PC patients who underwent 3T prostate MRI, using high b-value diffusion-weighted imaging from 2011–2015. Using 3D slicer, areas of suspected tumor (T) and normal tissue (N) on ADC (b=0,1400) were outlined volumetrically. Mean ADCT, mean ADCN, ADCratio (ADCT/ADCN) were calculated. PI-RADSv2 was assigned. Three csPC definitions were used: (A) Gleason score (GS)≥4+3; (B) GS≥3+4; (C) MRI-based tumor volume>0.5cc. Performances of ADC parameters and PI-RADSv2 in identifying csPC were measured using nonparametric comparison of receiver operating characteristic curves using the area under the curve (AUC). 85 cases met eligibility requirements. Diagnostic performances (AUC) in identifying csPC using 3 definitions were: (A) ADCT (0.83) was higher than PI-RADSv2 (0.65, p=0.006); (B) ADCT (0.86) was higher than ADCratio (0.68, p<0.001), and PI-RADSv2 (0.70, p=0.04); (C) PI-RADSv2 (0.73) performed better than ADCratio (0.56, p=0.02). ADCT performance was higher when csPC was defined by A or B versus C (p=0.038 and p=0.01, respectively). ADCratio performed better when csPC was defined by A versus C (p=0.01). PI-RADSv2 performance was not affected by csPC definition. When csPC was defined by GS, ADC parameters provided better csPC discrimination than PI-RADSv2, with ADCT providing best result. When csPC was defined by MRI-calculated volume, PI-RADSv2 provided better discrimination than ADCratio. csPC definition did not affect PI-RADSv2 diagnostic performance.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1007/s00261-016-0942-1
发表时间：
2017-03
期刊：
Abdominal radiology (New York)
影响因子：
--
作者：
Glazer DI;Hassanzadeh E;Fedorov A;Olubiyi OI;Goldberger SS;Penzkofer T;Flood TA;Masry P;Mulkern RV;Hirsch MS;Tempany CM;Fennessy FM
通讯作者：
Fennessy FM
影响因子：
2.4
作者：
Lin, W. C.;Westphalen, A. C.;Muglia, V. F.
通讯作者：
Muglia, V. F.
影响因子：
23.4
作者：
Loeb, Stacy;Bjurlin, Marc A.;Nicholson, Joseph;Tammela, Teuvo L.;Penson, David F.;Carter, H. Ballentine;Carroll, Peter;Etzioni, Ruth
通讯作者：
Etzioni, Ruth
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Jambor, Ivan;Bostrom, Peter J.;Aronen, Hannu J.
通讯作者：
Aronen, Hannu J.
前列腺癌的多参数MRI：最新技术的最新信息及其在检测和定位前列腺癌方面的表现。
DOI：
10.1002/jmri.23860
发表时间：
2013-05
期刊：
Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI
影响因子：
--
作者：
Hegde JV;Mulkern RV;Panych LP;Fennessy FM;Fedorov A;Maier SE;Tempany CM
通讯作者：
Tempany CM