Improved diagnostic accuracy of readout-segmented echo-planar imaging for peripheral zone clinically significant prostate cancer: a retrospective 3T MRI study.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Feb 2024
08 Feb 2024
Historique:
received:
21
06
2023
accepted:
06
02
2024
medline:
9
2
2024
pubmed:
9
2
2024
entrez:
8
2
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This study compares the readout-segmented echo-planar imaging (rsEPI) from the conventional single-shot EPI (ssEPI) diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for the discrimination of patients with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) within the peripheral zone (PZ) using apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps and pathology report from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy. We queried a retrospective monocentric database of patients with targeted biopsy. csPCa patients were defined as an International Society of Urological Pathology grade group ≥ 2. Group-level analyses and diagnostic accuracy of mean ADC values (ADC
Identifiants
pubmed: 38332131
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-53898-0
pii: 10.1038/s41598-024-53898-0
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3299Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Drost, F.-J.H. et al. Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 4, CD012663. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012663.pub2 (2019).
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012663.pub2
pubmed: 31022301
Turkbey, B. et al. Update of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2. Eur. Urol. 2019(76), 340–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033
McNeal, J. E., Redwine, E. A., Freiha, F. S. & Stamey, T. A. Zonal distribution of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 12, 897–906. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000478-198812000-00001 (1988).
doi: 10.1097/00000478-198812000-00001
pubmed: 3202246
Nagel, K. N. A. et al. Differentiation of prostatitis and prostate cancer by using diffusion-weighted MR imaging and MR-guided biopsy at 3T. Radiology 267, 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12111683 (2013).
doi: 10.1148/radiol.12111683
pubmed: 23329653
Hambrock, T. et al. Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. Radiology 259, 453–461. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11091409 (2011).
doi: 10.1148/radiol.11091409
pubmed: 21502392
Boesen, L., Chabanova, E., Løgager, V., Balslev, I. & Thomsen, H. S. Apparent diffusion coefficient ratio correlates significantly with prostate cancer Gleason score at final pathology. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging JMRI 42, 446–453. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24801 (2015).
doi: 10.1002/jmri.24801
pubmed: 25408104
Surov, A., Meyer, H. J. & Wienke, A. Correlations between apparent diffusion coefficient and Gleason score in prostate cancer: A systematic review. Eur. Urol. Oncol. 3, 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2018.12.006 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.12.006
pubmed: 31412009
Meyer, H.-J., Wienke, A. & Surov, A. Discrimination between clinical significant and insignificant prostate cancer with apparent diffusion coefficient—A systematic review and meta analysis. BMC Cancer 20, 482. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-06942-x (2020).
doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-06942-x
pubmed: 32460795
pmcid: 7254689
Costa, D. N. et al. Prospective inclusion of apparent diffusion coefficients in multiparametric prostate MRI structured reports: Discrimination of clinically insignificant and significant cancers. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 212, 109–116. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.18.19937 (2019).
doi: 10.2214/AJR.18.19937
pubmed: 30383404
Porter, D. A. & Heidemann, R. M. High resolution diffusion-weighted imaging using readout-segmented echo-planar imaging, parallel imaging and a two-dimensional navigator-based reacquisition. Magn. Reson. Med. 62, 468–475. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.22024 (2009).
doi: 10.1002/mrm.22024
pubmed: 19449372
Klingebiel, M. et al. Advanced diffusion weighted imaging of the prostate: Comparison of readout-segmented multi-shot, parallel-transmit and single-shot echo-planar imaging. Eur. J. Radiol. 130, 109161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109161 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109161
pubmed: 32650128
Li, L. et al. Feasibility study of 3-T DWI of the prostate: Readout-segmented versus single-shot echo-planar imaging. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 205, 70–76. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13489 (2015).
doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.13489
pubmed: 26102382
Mottet, N. et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer-2020 update. Part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur. Urol. 79, 243–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042
pubmed: 33172724
de Rooij, M. et al. ESUR/ESUI consensus statements on multi-parametric MRI for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: Quality requirements for image acquisition, interpretation and radiologists’ training. Eur. Radiol. 30, 5404–5416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06929-z (2020).
doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-06929-z
pubmed: 32424596
pmcid: 7476997
Chao, S.-L., Metens, T. & Lemort, M. TumourMetrics: A comprehensive clinical solution for the standardization of DCE-MRI analysis in research and routine use. Quant. Imaging Med. Surg. 7, 496–510. https://doi.org/10.21037/qims.2017.09.02 (2017).
doi: 10.21037/qims.2017.09.02
pubmed: 29184762
pmcid: 5682402
Schneider, C. A., Rasband, W. S. & Eliceiri, K. W. NIH image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 671–675. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2089 (2012).
doi: 10.1038/nmeth.2089
pubmed: 22930834
pmcid: 5554542
DeLong, E. R., DeLong, D. M. & Clarke-Pearson, D. L. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: A nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44, 837–845 (1988).
doi: 10.2307/2531595
pubmed: 3203132
Youden, W. J. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer 3, 32–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1%3c32::aid-cncr2820030106%3e3.0.co;2-3 (1950).
doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1<32::aid-cncr2820030106>3.0.co;2-3
pubmed: 15405679
Riches, S. F., Hawtin, K., Charles-Edwards, E. M. & de Souza, N. M. Diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate and rectal wall: Comparison of biexponential and monoexponential modelled diffusion and associated perfusion coefficients. NMR Biomed. 22, 318–325. https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.1328 (2009).
doi: 10.1002/nbm.1328
pubmed: 19009566
Mulkern, R. V. et al. Biexponential characterization of prostate tissue water diffusion decay curves over an extended b-factor range. Magn. Reson. Imaging 24, 563–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2005.12.008 (2006).
doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2005.12.008
pubmed: 16735177
pmcid: 1880900
Shinmoto, H. et al. Biexponential apparent diffusion coefficients in prostate cancer. Magn. Reson. Imaging 27, 355–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2008.07.008 (2009).
doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2008.07.008
pubmed: 18768281
Boschheidgen, M. et al. MRI grading for the prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness. Eur. Radiol. 32, 2351–2359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08332-8 (2022).
doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-08332-8
pubmed: 34748064
Takahashi, H. et al. Impact of measurement method on interobserver variability of apparent diffusion coefficient of lesions in prostate MRI. PLoS ONE 17, e0268829. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268829 (2022).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268829
pubmed: 35604891
pmcid: 9126398