Predictive ability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for detecting prostate cancer and its clinical significance in MRI-targeted biopsy for prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) ≥3 lesions

AIM

Identifying the index lesion in prostate cancer (PCa) is vital for its treatment. Therefore, various coefficients and parameters are used to improve the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This study aimed to analyze MRI data, utilized as a triage test before prostate biopsy, to identify independent risk factors affecting negative biopsy results in PCa and investigate the ability of these factors to predict clinically significant and insignificant PCa (csPCa and ciPCa, respectively).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 364 patients with a prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) v2.1 score of 3 or higher, who underwent cognitive MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB). Of the patients, 226 (62.1%) had benign lesions, 75 (20.6%) were diagnosed with ciPCa, and 63 (17.3%) with csPCa. The study assessed patients' demographic, biochemical, and radiologic characteristics, including apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and ADC coefficient of variation (ADCCoV) values.

RESULTS

The multivariate analysis performed to differentiate PCa from benign pathologies revealed that only MRI parameters, specifically the presence of PI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions (odds ratio [OR]: 12, p < 0.001 and OR: 73, p = 0.008, respectively), a lower ADC value (OR: 0.996, p = 0.041) and a higher ADCCoV value (OR: 1.07, p = 0.003) were independent risk factors. No MRI findings had significant predictive power for csPCa, with total prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (OR: 1.17, p = 0.019) found to be the only independent risk factor.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that data obtained from MRI can predict PCa but not csPCa.

Diagnostic performance of ADC and ADCratio in MRI-based prostate cancer assessment: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To identify factors influencing the diagnostic performance of the quantitative imaging biomarkers ADC and ADCratio in prostate cancer (PCa) detection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in Embase, Medline and Web of Science, for studies evaluating ADC values and ADCratio for PCa diagnosis, using the same patient cohorts and using histopathological references as ground truth. Pooled sensitivities, specificities, summary ROC curves and AUCs were calculated from constructed contingency data tables. Diagnostic performance (AUC) was quantitatively pooled using a bivariate mixed effects model. For identifying influencing factors, subgroup analysis, publication bias and heterogeneity assessment were investigated.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies, involving 1038 patients and 1441 lesions, were included. For ADC, the pooled sensitivity and specificity was 80% (95% CI: 74-85%) and 78% (95% CI: 70-85%), respectively. For ADCratio pooled sensitivity and specificity was 80% (95% CI: 74-84%) and 80% (95% CI: 71-87%). Summary ROC analysis revealed AUCs of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.89) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.89), respectively. Meta-regression showed heterogeneity between both imaging biomarkers. Subgroup analysis showed that ADCratio improved diagnostic performance in comparison to ADC when including both peripheral and transitional zone lesions (AUC: 0.87 [95% CI: 0.84-0.90] and 0.82 [95% CI: 0.79-0.85], respectively).

CONCLUSION

Both ADC and ADCratio imaging biomarkers showed good and comparable diagnostic performance in PCa diagnosis. However, ADCratio shows better diagnostic performance than ADC in diagnosing transition zone cancers.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

In quantitative MRI-based PCa diagnosis, the imaging biomarker ADCratio is useful in challenging MRI readings of lesions. Understanding the performance of quantitative imaging biomarkers better can aid diagnostic MRI protocols, enhancing the precision of PCa assessments.

KEY POINTS

MRI diffusion-weighted imaging-based ADC and ADCratio have comparable diagnostic performance in PCa assessment. In contrast to ADC, the ADCratio improves diagnostic performance, when assessing whole gland lesions. Compared to ADCratio, the ADC demonstrates enhanced diagnostic performance when evaluating peripheral zone lesions.

The Role of Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluating Prostate Adenocarcinoma: A Partially-Blinded Retrospective Study of a Prostatectomy Patient Cohort With Whole Gland Histopathology Correlation and Application of PI-RADS or TNM Staging

BACKGROUND

Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the current Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2.1 (PI-RADS v2.1) is considered optional, with primary scoring based on T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) and diffusion weighted imaging (DWI). Our study is designed to assess the relative contribution of DCE MRI in a patient-cohort with whole mount prostate histopathology and spatially-mapped prostate adenocarcinoma (PCa) for reference.

METHODS

We performed a partially-blinded retrospective review of 47 prostatectomy patients with recent multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI). Scans included T2WI, DWI with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping, and DCE imaging. Lesion conspicuity was scored on a 10-point scale with ≥ 6 considered "positive," and image quality was assessed on a 4-point scale for each sequence. The diagnostic contribution of DCE images was evaluated on a 4-point scale. The mpMRI studies were assigned PI-RADS scores and tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) T-stage with blinded comparison to spatially-mapped whole-mount pathology. Results were compared to the prospective clinical reports, which used standardized PI-RADS templates that emphasize T2WI, DWI and ADC.

RESULTS

Per lesion sensitivity for PCa was 93.5%, 82.6%, 63.0%, and 58.7% on T2WI, DCE, ADC and DWI, respectively. Mean lesion conspicuity was 8.5, 7.9, 6.2, and 6.1, on T2W, DCE, ADC and DWI, respectively. The higher values on T2WI and DCE imaging were not significantly different from each other but were both significantly different from DWI and ADC (p < 0.001). DCE scans were determined to have a marked diagnostic contribution in 83% of patients, with the most common diagnostic yield being detection of contralateral peripheral zone tumor or delineating presence/absence of extra-prostatic extension (EPE), contributing to more accurate PCa staging by PI-RADS or TNM, as compared to histopathology.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate that DCE may contribute to lesion detection and local staging as compared to T2WI plus DWI-ADC alone and that lesion conspicuity using DCE is markedly improved as compared to DWI-ADC. These findings support modification of PI-RADS v2.1 to include use of DCE acquisitions and that a TNM staging is feasible on mpMRI as compared to surgical pathology.

Differentiating clinically significant prostate cancer from clinically insignificant prostate cancer using qualitative and semi-quantitative indices of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI

PURPOSE

To investigate the utility of qualitative and semi-quantitative evaluation of DCE-MRI for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC).

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed 307 lesions in 231 patients who underwent 3.0T MRI. Experienced radiologists assessed PI-RADS v 2.1 assessment category, qualitative contrast enhancement (QCE), contrast enhancement pattern (CEP: type 1, 2, 3), tumor contrast ratio, and tumor size of PC lesions in consensus. Mean and 0-10th-percentile ADC value of the lesion (ADCmean and ADC0-10) were calculated. Specimens obtained from MRI-ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsy were used as the pathological reference standard.

RESULTS

In assessment of tumor aggressiveness, PI-RADS assessment category, QCE, tumor size, and ratio of CEP 2 + 3 were significantly higher in PC with Gleason score (GS) ≥ 3 + 4 (n = 256) than in PC with GS = 6 (n = 51) (P ≤ 0.001). Tumor ADCmean and tumor ADC0-10 were comparable between PC with GS ≥ 3 + 4 and PC with GS = 6 (P = 0.164 to 0.504). Regarding diagnostic performance of csPC in 45 PI-RADS 3 transition zone lesions, only ratio of CEP 2 + 3 was significantly higher in PC with GS ≥ 3 + 4 (n = 31) than in PC with GS = 6 (n = 14) (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

Qualitative DCE-MRI indices may contribute to PC aggressiveness and improve detection of csPC in PI-RADS assessment category 3 lesions.

Role of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Value and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Ratio as Prognostic Factors for Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is one of the most prevalent cancers in the male population. To determine the aggressiveness of suspected lesions precisely, predictive models are increasingly being developed using quantitative MRI measurements, and particularly the ADC value. This study aimed to determine whether ADC values could be used to establish the aggressiveness of prostate cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center study included 398 patients with prostate cancer who underwent a multiparametric MRI prior to radical prostatectomy. DWI ADC values were measured (µm2/s) using b values of 50 and 1000. The dominant lesion best visualized on MRI was analyzed. The ADC values of the index lesion and reference tissue were compared to tumor aggressivity according to the Gleason grade groups based on radical prostatectomy results. Statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis H test, Spearman's rank correlation, and ROC curves.

RESULTS

A very strong negative correlation (rs = -0.846, p < 0.001) between ADC and GS was found. ROC analysis revealed an AUC of 0.958 and an ADC threshold value of 758 µm2/s in clinically significant prostate cancer diagnoses using the absolute ADC value, with no advantage of using the ADC ratio over the absolute ADC value being identified.

CONCLUSION

DWI ADC values and the calculated ADC ratio have a significant inverse correlation with GS. The findings indicate a strong capability in determining prostate cancer aggressiveness, as well as the possibility of assisting with assigning PI-RADS categories using ADC as quantitative metrics.

Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: A review of current technology

Prostate cancer (PCa) imaging forms an important part of PCa clinical management. Magnetic resonance imaging is the modality of choice for prostate imaging. Most of the current imaging assessment is qualitative i.e., based on visual inspection and thus subjected to inter-observer disagreement. Quantitative imaging is better than qualitative assessment as it is more objective, and standardized, thus improving interobserver agreement. Apart from detecting PCa, few quantitative parameters may have potential to predict disease aggressiveness, and thus can be used for prognosis and deciding the course of management. There are various magnetic resonance imaging-based quantitative parameters and few of them are already part of PIRADS v.2.1. However, there are many other parameters that are under study and need further validation by rigorous multicenter studies before recommending them for routine clinical practice. This review intends to discuss the existing quantitative methods, recent developments, and novel techniques in detail.

A pictorial essay of PI-RADS pearls and pitfalls: toward less ambiguity and better practice

Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) was designed to standardize the interpretation of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate, aiding in assessing the probability of clinically significant prostate cancer. By providing a structured scoring system, it enables better risk stratification, guiding decisions regarding the need for biopsy and subsequent treatment options. In this article, we explore both the strengths and weaknesses of PI-RADS, offering insights into its updated diagnostic performance and clinical applications, while also addressing potential pitfalls using diverse, representative MRI cases.

Evaluating residual tumor after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer: diagnostic performance and outcomes using biparametric vs. multiparametric MRI

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) before radical cystectomy is standard of care in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Response assessment after NAC is important but suboptimal using CT. We assessed MRI without vs. with intravenous contrast (biparametric [BP] vs. multiparametric [MP]) for identifying residual disease on cystectomy and explored its prognostic role.

METHODS

Consecutive MIBC patients that underwent NAC, MRI, and cystectomy between January 2000-November 2022 were identified. Two radiologists reviewed BP-MRI (T2 + DWI) and MP-MRI (T2 + DWI + DCE) for residual tumor. Diagnostic performances were compared using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to evaluate association with disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

61 patients (36 men and 25 women; median age 65 years, interquartile range 59-72) were included. After NAC, no residual disease was detected on pathology in 19 (31.1%) patients. BP-MRI was more accurate than MP-MRI for detecting residual disease after NAC: area under the curve = 0.75 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.62-0.85) vs. 0.58 (95% CI, 0.45-0.70; p = 0.043). Sensitivity were identical (65.1%; 95% CI, 49.1-79.0) but specificity was higher in BP-MRI compared with MP-MRI for determining residual disease: 77.8% (95% CI, 52.4-93.6) vs. 38.9% (95% CI, 17.3-64.3), respectively. Positive BP-MRI and residual disease on pathology were both associated with worse DFS: hazard ratio (HR) = 4.01 (95% CI, 1.70-9.46; p = 0.002) and HR = 5.13 (95% CI, 2.66-17.13; p = 0.008), respectively. Concordance between MRI and pathology results was significantly associated with DFS. Concordant positive (MRI+/pathology+) patients showed worse DFS than concordant negative (MRI-/pathology-) patients (HR = 8.75, 95% CI, 2.02-37.82; p = 0.004) and compared to the discordant group (MRI+/pathology- or MRI-/pathology+) with HR = 3.48 (95% CI, 1.39-8.71; p = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

BP-MRI was more accurate than MP-MRI for identifying residual disease after NAC. A negative BP-MRI was associated with better outcomes, providing complementary information to pathological assessment of cystectomy specimens.

MR imaging features to predict the type of bone metastasis in prostate cancer

Bone metastases (BMs) of prostate cancer (PCa) have been considered predominantly osteoblastic, but non-osteoblastic (osteolytic or mixed osteoblastic and osteolytic) BMs can occur. We investigated the differences in prostate MRI and clinical findings between patients with osteoblastic and non-osteoblastic BMs. Between 2014 and 2021, patients with pathologically proven PCa without a history of other malignancies were included in this study. Age, Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density, normalized mean apparent diffusion coefficient and normalized T2 signal intensity (nT2SI) of PCa, and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System category on MRI were compared between groups. A multivariate logistic regression analysis using factors with P-values < 0.2 was performed to detect the independent parameters for predicting non-osteoblastic BM group. Twenty-five (mean 73 ± 6.6 years) and seven (69 ± 13.1 years) patients were classified into the osteoblastic and non-osteoblastic groups, respectively. PSA density and nT2SI were significantly higher in the non-osteoblastic group than in the osteoblastic group. nT2SI was an independent predictive factor for non-osteoblastic BMs in the multivariate logistic regression analysis. These results indicated that PCa patients with high nT2SI and PSA density should be examined for osteolytic BMs.

Correlation between ADC, ADC ratio, and Gleason Grade group in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: Retrospective multicenter study with different MRI scanners

Background

MRI is an important tool in the prostate cancer work-up, with special emphasis on the ADC sequence. This study aimed to investigate the correlation between ADC and ADC ratio compared to tumor aggressiveness determined by a histopathological examination after radical prostatectomy.

Methods

Ninety-eight patients with prostate cancer underwent MRI at five different hospitals prior to radical prostatectomy. Images were retrospectively analyzed individually by two radiologists. The ADC of the index lesion and reference tissues (contralateral normal prostatic, normal peripheral zone, and urine) was recorded. Absolute ADC and different ADC ratios were compared to tumor aggressivity according to the ISUP Gleason Grade Groups extracted from the pathology report using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (ρ). ROC curves were used to evaluate the ability to discriminate between ISUP 1-2 and ISUP 3-5 and intra class correlation and Bland-Altman plots for interrater reliability.

Results

All patients had prostate cancer classified as ISUP grade ≥ 2. No correlation was found between ADC and ISUP grade. We found no benefit of using the ADC ratio over absolute ADC. The AUC for all metrics was close to 0.5, and no threshold could be extracted for prediction of tumor aggressivity. The interrater reliability was substantial to almost perfect for all variables analyzed.

Conclusions

ADC and ADC ratio did not correlate with tumor aggressiveness defined by ISUP grade in this multicenter MRI study. The result of this study is opposite to previous research in the field.

[Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v 2.1: Overview and Critical Points]

The technical parameters and imaging interpretation criteria of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) using multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) are updated in PI-RADS v2.1. These changes have been an expected improvement for prostate cancer evaluation, although some issues remain unsolved, and new issues have been raised. In this review, a brief overview of PI-RADS v2.1 is and several critical points are discussed as follows: the need for more detailed protocols of mpMRI, lack of validation of the revised transition zone interpretation criteria, the need for clarification for the revised diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging criteria, anterior fibromuscular stroma and central zone assessment, assessment of background signal and tumor aggressiveness, changes in the structured report, the need for the parameters for imaging quality and performance control, and indications for expansion of the system to include other indications.

A Prognostic Model Generated from an Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Ratio Reliably Predicts the Outcomes of Oral Tongue Squamous Cell Carcinoma

This study aimed to develop an apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratio-based prognostic model to predict the recurrence and disease-free survival (DFS) of oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma (OTSCC). A total of 188 patients with cT1-2 oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma were enrolled retrospectively. Clinical and laboratory data were extracted from medical records. The ADC values were measured at the regions of interest of the tumor and non-tumor tissues of the MRI images, and the ADC ratio was used for comparison between the patient with recurrence (n = 83 case, 44%) and patients without recurrence (n = 105 cases, 56%). Cox proportional hazards models were generated to analyze the risk factors of cancer recurrence. A nomogram was developed based on significant risk factors to predict 1-, 5- and 10-year DFS. The receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves of predictors in the multivariable Cox proportional hazards prognostic model were generated to predict the recurrence and DFS. The integrated areas under the ROC curve were calculated to evaluate discrimination of the models. The ADC ratio, tumor thickness and lymph node ratio were reliable predictors in the final prognostic model. The final model had a 71.1% sensitivity and an 81.0% specificity. ADC ratio was the strongest predictor of cancer recurrence in prognostic performance. Discrimination and calibration statistics were satisfactory with C-index above 0.7 for both model development and internal validation. The calibration curve showed that the 5- and 10-year DFS predicted by the nomogram agreed with actual observations.

Noninferiority of Monoparametric MRI Versus Multiparametric MRI for the Detection of Prostate Cancer: Diagnostic Accuracy of ADC Ratios Based on Advanced "Zoomed" Diffusion-Weighted Imaging

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratios as a monoparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol for the detection of prostate cancer (PCa) with the established multiparametric (mp) MRI at 3.0 T.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

According to power analysis, 52 male patients were included in this monocenter study with prospective data collection and retrospective, blinded multireader image analysis. The study was approved by the local ethics committee. Patients were recruited from January to December 2020. Based on mpMRI findings, patients underwent in-bore MR biopsy or prostatectomy for histopathologic correlation of suspicious lesions. Three readers, blinded to the histopathologic results and images of mpMRI, independently evaluated ADC maps for the detection of PCa. The ADC ratio was defined as the lowest signal intensity (SI) of lesions divided by the SI of normal tissue in the zone of origin. Predictive accuracy of multiparametric and monoparametric MRI were compared using logistic regression analysis. Moreover, both protocols were compared applying goodness-of-fit analysis with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test for continuous ADC ratios and Pearson χ2 test for binary decision calls, correlation analysis with Spearman ρ and intraclass correlation coefficients, as well as noninferiority assessment with a TOST ("two one-sided test").

RESULTS

Eighty-one histopathologically proven, unique PCa lesions (Gleason score [GS] ≥ 3 + 3) in 52 patients could be unequivocally correlated, with 57 clinically significant (cs) PCa lesions (GS ≥ 3 + 4). Multiparametric MRI detected 95%, and monoparametric ADC detected ratios 91% to 93% of csPCa. Noninferiority of monoparametric MRI was confirmed by TOST (P < 0.05 for all comparisons). Logistic regression analysis revealed comparable predictive diagnostic accuracy of ADC ratios (73.7%-87.8%) versus mpMRI (72.2%-84.7%). Spearman rank correlation coefficient for PCa aggressiveness revealed satisfactory correlation of ADC ratios (P < 0.013 for all correlations). The Hosmer-Lemeshow test for the logistic regression analysis for continuous ADC ratios indicated adequate predictive accuracy (P = 0.55-0.87), and the Pearson χ2 test showed satisfactory goodness of fit (P = 0.35-0.69, χ2 = 0.16-0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Normalized ADC ratios based on advanced DWI are noninferior to mpMRI at 3.0 T for the detection of csPCa in a preselected patient cohort and proved a fast and accurate assessment tool, thus showing a potential prospect of easing the development of future screening methods for PCa.

Magnetic resonance fingerprinting in prostate cancer before and after contrast enhancement

OBJECTIVES

To assess the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values and the T1 and T2 values derived from nonenhanced (NE) and contrast-enhanced (CE) magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) in the prostate gland and to evaluate differences in values among prostate cancer, the normal peripheral zone (PZ) and the normal transition zone (TZ).

METHODS

Fifty-seven patients (median age, 73 years; range, 48-86) with prostate cancer who underwent multiparametric MRI including NE and CE MRF were included in this study. T1 and T2 values were extracted from NE and CE MRF, respectively. Five quantitative values (the ADC, NE T1, NE T2, CE T1 and CE T2 values) were measured in three areas: prostate cancer, PZ and TZ. We compared the values among the three areas and evaluated the differences between NE MRF and CE MRF values.

RESULTS

ADC values and MRF-derived values were significantly higher in PZ than prostate cancer or TZ (p < 0.001). TZ had a significantly lower CE T1 but significantly higher values of the other variables than prostate cancer (p < 0.001). The T1 values in all three areas and the T2 values in prostate cancer and TZ were significantly lower on CE MRF than on NE MRF (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Quantitative analysis of NE and CE MRI can be conducted by using the MRF technique. The ADC value and the T1 and T2 values from CE MRF and NE MRF were found to be significantly different between prostate cancer and normal prostate tissue.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The T1 and T2 values from contrast-enhanced MR fingerprinting are significantly different between prostate cancer and normal prostate tissue.

Non-timely clinically applicable ADC ratio in prostate mpMRI: a comparison with fusion biopsy results

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of ADC ratio and to evaluate its efficacy in reducing the number of false positives in prostatic mpMRI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent an mpMRI and a targeted fusion biopsy in our institution from 2016 to 2021 were retrospectively selected. Two experienced readers (R1 and R2) independently evaluated the images, blindly to biopsy results. The radiologists assessed the ADC ratios by tracing a circular 10 mm² ROI on the biopsied lesion and on the apparently benign contralateral parenchyma. Prostate cancers were divided into non-clinically significant (nsPC, Gleason score = 6) and clinically significant (sPC, Gleason score ≥ 7). ROC analyses were performed.

RESULTS

167 patients and188 lesions were included. Concordance was 0.62 according to Cohen's K. ADC ratio showed an AUC for PCAs of 0.78 in R1 and 0.8 in R2. The AUC for sPC was 0.85 in R1 and 0.84 in R2. The 100% sensitivity cut-off for sPCs was 0.65 (specificity 25.6%) in R1 and 0.66 (specificity 27.4%) in R2. Forty-three benign or not clinically significant lesions were above the 0.65 threshold in R1; 46 were above the 0.66 cut-off in R2. This would have allowed to avoid an equal number of unnecessary biopsies at the cost of 2 nsPCs in R1 and one nsPC in R2.

CONCLUSION

In our sample, the ADC ratio was a useful and accurate tool that could potentially reduce the number of false positives in mpMRI.

A Pilot Study of Multidimensional Diffusion MRI for Assessment of Tissue Heterogeneity in Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this exploratory study were to investigate the feasibility of multidimensional diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (MddMRI) in assessing diffusion heterogeneity at both a macroscopic and microscopic level in prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Informed consent was obtained from 46 subjects who underwent 3.0-T prostate multiparametric MRI, complemented with a prototype spin echo-based MddMRI sequence in this institutional review board-approved study. Prostate cancer tumors and comparative normal tissue from each patient were contoured on both apparent diffusion coefficient and MddMRI-derived mean diffusivity (MD) maps (from which microscopic diffusion heterogeneity [MKi] and microscopic diffusion anisotropy were derived) using 3D Slicer. The discriminative ability of MddMRI-derived parameters to differentiate PCa from normal tissue was determined using the Friedman test. To determine if tumor diffusion heterogeneity is similar on macroscopic and microscopic scales, the linear association between SD of MD and mean MKi was estimated using robust regression (bisquare weighting). Hypothesis testing was 2 tailed; P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

All MddMRI-derived parameters could distinguish tumor from normal tissue in the fixed-effects analysis (P < 0.0001). Tumor MKi was higher (P < 0.05) compared with normal tissue (median, 0.40; interquartile range, 0.29-0.52 vs 0.20-0.18; 0.25), as was tumor microscopic diffusion anisotropy (0.55; 0.36-0.81 vs 0.20-0.15; 0.28). The MKi could not be predicted (no significant association) by SD of MD. There was a significant correlation between tumor volume and SD of MD (R2 = 0.50, slope = 0.008 μm2/ms per millimeter, P < 0.001) but not between tumor volume and MKi.

CONCLUSIONS

This explorative study demonstrates that MddMRI provides novel information on MKi and microscopic anisotropy, which differ from measures at the macroscopic level. MddMRI has the potential to characterize tumor tissue heterogeneity at different spatial scales.

A Deep Learning Approach to Diagnostic Classification of Prostate Cancer Using Pathology-Radiology Fusion

BACKGROUND

A definitive diagnosis of prostate cancer requires a biopsy to obtain tissue for pathologic analysis, but this is an invasive procedure and is associated with complications.

PURPOSE

To develop an artificial intelligence (AI)-based model (named AI-biopsy) for the early diagnosis of prostate cancer using magnetic resonance (MR) images labeled with histopathology information.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective.

POPULATION

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data sets from 400 patients with suspected prostate cancer and with histological data (228 acquired in-house and 172 from external publicly available databases).

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

1.5 to 3.0 Tesla, T2-weighted image pulse sequences.

ASSESSMENT

MR images reviewed and selected by two radiologists (with 6 and 17 years of experience). The patient images were labeled with prostate biopsy including Gleason Score (6 to 10) or Grade Group (1 to 5) and reviewed by one pathologist (with 15 years of experience). Deep learning models were developed to distinguish 1) benign from cancerous tumor and 2) high-risk tumor from low-risk tumor.

STATISTICAL TESTS

To evaluate our models, we calculated negative predictive value, positive predictive value, specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy. We also calculated areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUCs) and Cohen's kappa.

RESULTS

Our computational method (https://github.com/ih-lab/AI-biopsy) achieved AUCs of 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.86-0.92]) and 0.78 (95% CI: [0.74-0.82]) to classify cancer vs. benign and high- vs. low-risk of prostate disease, respectively.

DATA CONCLUSION

AI-biopsy provided a data-driven and reproducible way to assess cancer risk from MR images and a personalized strategy to potentially reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies. AI-biopsy highlighted the regions of MR images that contained the predictive features the algorithm used for diagnosis using the class activation map method. It is a fully automatic method with a drag-and-drop web interface (https://ai-biopsy.eipm-research.org) that allows radiologists to review AI-assessed MR images in real time.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 2.

Comparison of mono-exponential, bi-exponential, kurtosis, and fractional-order calculus models of diffusion-weighted imaging in characterizing prostate lesions in transition zone

PURPOSE

To compare various models of diffusion-weighted imaging including mono-exponential, bi-exponential, diffusion kurtosis (DK) and fractional-order calculus (FROC) models in diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa) in transition zone (TZ) and distinguish the high-grade PCa [Gleason score (GS) ≥ 7] lesions from the total of low-grade PCa (GS ≤ 6) lesions and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in TZ.

METHODS

80 Patients with 103 lesions were included in this study. Nine metrics [including apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) derived from mono-exponential model, slow diffusion coefficient (D_s), fast diffusion coefficient (D_f),, and f (the fraction of fast diffusion) from bi-exponential model; mean diffusivity (MD) and mean kurtosis (MK) from DK model; diffusion coefficient (D), fractional-order derivative in space (β), and spatial metric (μ) from FROC model] were calculated. Comparisons between BPH and PCa lesions as well as between clinically significant PCa (CsPCa) (GS ≥ 7, n = 31) and clinically insignificant lesions (Cins) (GS ≤ 6 and BPH, n = 72) of these metrics were conducted. Mann-Whitney U-test and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were used for statistical evaluations.

RESULTS

The areas under the ROC curve (AUC) values of β derived from FROC model were 0.778 and 0.853 in differentiating PCa from BPH and in differentiating CS (GS ≥ 7) from Cins (GS ≤ 6 and BPH), both were the highest compared to other metrics. The AUC value of β was significantly higher than that of ADC (P = 0.009) in differentiating CS from Cins, while the differentiation between BPH and PCa did not reach the statistical significance when comparing with ADC (P = 0.089).

CONCLUSION

Although no significant difference was found in distinguishing PCa from BPH, the metric β derived from FROC model was superior to other diffusion metrics in differentiation between CS and Cins in TZ.

Comparison of single-scanner single-protocol quantitative ADC measurements to ADC ratios to detect clinically significant prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Mean ADC has high predictive value for the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC). Measurement variability is introduced by different scanners, protocols, intra-and inter-patient variation. Internal calibration by ADC ratios can address such fluctuations however can potentially lower the biological value of quantitative ADC determination by being sensitive to deviations in reference tissue signal.

PURPOSE

To better understand the predictive value of quantitative ADC measurements in comparison to internal reference ratios when measured in a single scanner, single protocol setup.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

284 consecutive patients who underwent 3 T MRI on a single scanner followed by MRI-transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy were included. A board-certified radiologist retrospectively reviewed all MRIs blinded to clinical information and placed regions of interest (ROI) on all focal lesions and the following reference regions: normal-appearing peripheral zone (PZNL) and transition zone (TZNL), the urinary bladder (BLA), and right and left internal obturator muscle (RIOM, LIOM). ROI-based mean ADC and ADC ratios to the reference regions were compared regarding their ability to predict the aggressiveness of prostate cancer. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was used to estimate the correlation between ADC parameters, Gleason score (GS) and ADC ratios. The primary endpoint was presence of sPC, defined as a GS ≥ 3 + 4. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to predict sPC. Receiver operating characteristics curves (ROC) were used for visualization; DeLong test was used to evaluate the differences of the area under the curve (AUC). Bias-corrected AUC values and corresponding 95 %-CI were calculated using bootstrapping with 100 bootstrap samples.

RESULTS

After exclusion of patients who received prior treatment, 259 patients were included in the final cohort of which 220 harbored 351 MR lesions. Mean ADC and ADC ratios demonstrated a negative correlation with the GS. Mean ADC had the strongest correlation with ρ of -0.34, followed by ADCratioPZNL (ρ=-0.32). All ADC parameters except ADCratioLIOM (p = 0.07) were associated with sPC p<0.05). Mean ADC and ADCratioPZNL had the highest ROC AUC of all parameters (0.68). Multivariable models with mean ADC improve predictive performance.

CONCLUSIONS

A highly standardized single-scanner mean ADC measurement could not be improved upon using any of the single ADC ratio parameters or combinations of these parameters in predicting the aggressiveness of prostate cancer.

PI-RADS Version 2.1: A Critical Review, From the AJR Special Series on Radiology Reporting and Data Systems

PI-RADS version 2.1 updates the technical parameters for multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of the prostate and revises the imaging interpretation criteria while maintaining the framework introduced in version 2. These changes have been considered an improvement, although some issues remain unresolved, and new issues have emerged. Areas for improvement discussed in this review include the need for more detailed mpMRI protocols with optimization for 1.5-T and 3-T systems; lack of validation of revised transition zone interpretation criteria and need for clarifications of the revised DWI and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging criteria and central zone (CZ) assessment; the need for systematic evaluation and reporting of background changes in signal intensity in the prostate that can negatively affect cancer detection; creation of a new category for lesions that do not fit into the PI-RADS assessment categories (i.e., PI-RADS M category); inclusion of quantitative parameters beyond size to evaluate lesion aggressiveness; adjustments to the structured report template, including standardized assessment of the risk of extraprostatic extension; development of parameters for image quality and performance control; and suggestions for expansion of the system to other indications (e.g., active surveillance and recurrence).

Multiparametric MRI as a Biomarker of Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer-A Pilot Study

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To explore a role for multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) as a biomarker of response to neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board and was HIPAA compliant. Eight patients with localized PCa had a baseline mpMRI, repeated after 6-months of ADT, followed by prostatectomy. mpMRI indices were extracted from tumor and normal regions of interest (TROI/NROI). Residual cancer burden (RCB) was measured on mpMRI and on the prostatectomy specimen. Paired t-tests compared TROI/NROI mpMRI indices and pre/post-treatment TROI mpMRI indices. Spearman's rank tested for correlations between MRI/pathology-based RCB, and between pathological RCB and mpMRI indices.

RESULTS

At baseline, TROI apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) was lower and dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) metrics were higher, compared to NROI (ADC: 806 ± 137 × 10^-6 vs. 1277 ± 213 × 10^-6 mm²/sec, p = 0.0005; K^trans: 0.346 ± 0.16 vs. 0.144 ± 0.06 min^-1, p = 0.002; AUC₉₀: 0.213 ± 0.08 vs. 0.11 ± 0.03, p = 0.002). Post-treatment, there was no change in TROI ADC, but a decrease in TROI K^trans (0.346 ± 0.16 to 0.188 ± 0.08 min^-1; p = 0.02) and AUC₉₀ (0.213 ± 0.08 to 0.13 ± 0.06; p = 0.02). Tumor volume decreased with ADT. There was no difference between mpMRI-based and pathology-based RCB, which positively correlated (⍴ = 0.74-0.81, p < 0.05). Pathology-based RCB positively correlated with post-treatment DCE metrics (⍴ = 0.76-0.70, p < 0.05) and negatively with ADC (⍴ = -0.79, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Given the heterogeneity of PCa, an individualized approach to ADT may maximize potential benefit. This pilot study suggests that mpMRI may serve as a biomarker of ADT response and as a surrogate for RCB at prostatectomy.

Removing rician bias in diffusional kurtosis of the prostate using real-data reconstruction

PURPOSE

To compare prostate diffusional kurtosis imaging (DKI) metrics generated using phase-corrected real data with those generated using magnitude data with and without noise compensation (NC).

METHODS

Diffusion-weighted images were acquired at 3T in 16 prostate cancer patients, measuring 6 b-values (0-1500 s/mm2 ), each acquired with 6 signal averages along 3 diffusion directions, with noise-only images acquired to allow NC. In addition to conventional magnitude averaging, phase-corrected real data were averaged in an attempt to reduce rician noise-bias, with a range of phase-correction low-pass filter (LPF) sizes (8-128 pixels) tested. Each method was also tested using simulations. Pixelwise maps of apparent diffusion (D) and apparent kurtosis (K) were calculated for magnitude data with and without NC and phase-corrected real data. Average values were compared in tumor, normal transition zone (NTZ), and normal peripheral zone (NPZ).

RESULTS

Simulations indicated LPF size can strongly affect K metrics, where 64-pixel LPFs produced accurate metrics. Relative to metrics estimated from magnitude data without NC, median NC K were lower (P < 0.0001) by 6/11/8% in tumor/NPZ/NTZ, 64-LPF real-data K were lower (P < 0.0001) by 4/10/7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Compared with magnitude data with NC, phase-corrected real data can produce similar K, although the choice of phase-correction LPF should be chosen carefully.

Discrimination between clinical significant and insignificant prostate cancer with apparent diffusion coefficient - a systematic review and meta analysis

Background

Prostate MRI has become a corner stone in diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC). Diffusion weighted imaging and the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) can be used to reflect tumor microstructure. The present analysis sought to compare ADC values of clinically insignificant with clinical significant PC based upon a large patient sample.

Methods

MEDLINE library and SCOPUS databases were screened for the associations between ADC and Gleason score (GS) in PC up to May 2019. The primary endpoint of the systematic review was the ADC value of PC groups according to Gleason score. In total 26 studies were suitable for the analysis and included into the present study. The included studies comprised a total of 1633 lesions.

Results

Clinically significant PCs (GS ≥ 7) were diagnosed in 1078 cases (66.0%) and insignificant PCs (GS 5 and 6) in 555 cases (34.0%). The pooled mean ADC value derived from monoexponenantially fitted ADC_mean of the clinically significant PC was 0.86 × 10^− 3 mm²/s [95% CI 0.83–0.90] and the pooled mean value of insignificant PC was 1.1 × 10^− 3 mm²/s [95% CI 1.03–1.18]. Clinical significant PC showed lower ADC values compared to non-significant PC. The pooled ADC values of clinically insignificant PCs were no lower than 0.75 × 10^− 3 mm²/s.

Conclusions

We evaluated the published literature comparing clinical insignificant with clinically prostate cancer in regard of the Apparent diffusion coefficient values derived from magnetic resonance imaging. We identified that the clinically insignificant prostate cancer have lower ADC values than clinically significant, which may aid in tumor noninvasive tumor characterization in clinical routine.

Accuracy of ADC ratio in discriminating true and false positives in multiparametric prostatic MRI

PURPOSE

Our goal was to evaluate the usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratios in discriminating true from false positives in multiparametric (mp) prostate MRI in clinical practice.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 98 prostate lesions in a series of 73 patients who had undergone prostate mpMRI and standard 12-core prostatic biopsy in our institution from 2016 to 2018. Two experienced radiologists performed double blind ADC value quantifications of both MRI-identified lesions and apparently benign contralateral prostatic parenchyma in a circular region of interest (ROI) of ∼10 mm². The ratios between the mean values of both measurements (i.e., ADC ratio mean) and between the minimum value of the lesion and the maximum value of the benign parenchyma (i.e., ADC ratio min-max) were automatically calculated. The malignancy of all lesions was determined through biopsy according to Gleason score (GS ≥ 6) and localization.

RESULTS

For Reader 1, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of ADC ratio mean and ADC ratio min-max were 0.72 and 0.67, respectively, whereas for Reader 2 these values were 0.74 and 0.71, respectively. The best cut-off values for ADC ratio means were ≥ 0.5 (Reader 1) and ≥ 0.6 (Reader 2), with a sensitivity of 76.3 % and 84.2 % and a specificity of 51.7 % and 50 %, respectively. Moreover, based on a threshold of 0.6, no clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was missed by Reader 1, while only one went unnoticed by Reader 2.

CONCLUSION

The ADC ratio is a useful and moderately accurate complementary tool to diagnose prostate cancer in the mp-MRI.

Biparametric versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: detection of clinically significant cancer in a perfect match group

Background

Biparametric (bp) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could be an alternative MRI for the detection of the clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

Purpose

To compare the accuracies of prostate cancer detection and localization between prebiopsy bpMRI and postbiopsy multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) taken on different days, using radical prostatectomy specimens as the reference standards.

Material and methods

Data of 41 total consecutive patients who underwent the following examinations and procedures between September 2015 and March 2017 were collected: (1) magnetic resonance- and/or ultrasonography-guided biopsy after bpMRI; (2) postbiopsy mpMRI; and (3) radical prostatectomy with csPCa. Two radiologists scored suspected lesions on bpMRI and mpMRI independently using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2. The diagnostic accuracy of detecting csPCa and the Dice similarity coefficient were obtained. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratios were also obtained for quantitative comparison between bpMRI and mpMRI.

Results

Diagnostic accuracies on bpMRI and mpMRI were 0.83 and 0.82 for reader 1; 0.80 and 0.82 for reader 2. There are no significantly different values of diagnostic sensitivities or specificities between the readers or between MRI protocols. Intra-observer Dice similarity coefficient was significantly lower in reader 2, compared to that in reader 1 between the two MRI protocols. The range of mean ADC ratio was 0.281-0.635. There was no statistically significant difference in the ADC ratio between bpMRI and mpMRI.

Conclusions

Diagnostic performance of bpMRI without dynamic contrast enhancement MRI is not significantly different from mpMRI with dynamic contrast enhancement MRI in the detection of csPCa.

Evaluation of T1 relaxation time in prostate cancer and benign prostate tissue using a Modified Look-Locker inversion recovery sequence

Purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of T1 relaxation time (T1) for differentiating prostate cancer (PCa) from benign tissue as well as high- from low-grade PCa. Twenty-three patients with suspicion for PCa were included in this prospective study. 3 T MRI including a Modified Look-Locker inversion recovery sequence was acquired. Subsequent targeted and systematic prostate biopsy served as a reference standard. T1 and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in PCa and reference regions without malignancy as well as high- and low-grade PCa were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. The performance of T1, ADC value, and a combination of both to differentiate PCa and reference regions was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. T1 and ADC value were lower in PCa compared to reference regions in the peripheral and transition zone (p < 0.001). ROC analysis revealed high AUCs for T1 (0.92; 95%-CI, 0.87-0.98) and ADC value (0.97; 95%-CI, 0.94 to 1.0) when differentiating PCa and reference regions. A combination of T1 and ADC value yielded an even higher AUC. The difference was statistically significant comparing it to the AUC for ADC value alone (p = 0.02). No significant differences were found between high- and low-grade PCa for T1 (p = 0.31) and ADC value (p = 0.8). T1 relaxation time differs significantly between PCa and benign prostate tissue with lower T1 in PCa. It could represent an imaging biomarker for PCa.

The Utility of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging and Perfusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging Parameters for Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer

Introduction

To establish the diagnostic performance of the parameters obtained from dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) and diffusion-weighted imaging at 3T in discriminating between non-clinically significant prostate cancers (ncsPCa, Gleason score [GS] < 7) and clinically significant prostate cancers (csPCa, GS ≥ 7) in the peripheral zone.

Materials and Methods

Twenty-six male patients with peripheral zone prostate cancer (PCa) who had undergone 3T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan prior to biopsy were included in the study and evaluated retrospectively. The GS was obtained by both standard 12-core transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy and targeted MRI-US fusion biopsy and then confirmed by prostatectomy, if available. For each confirmed tumour focus, DCE-derived quantitative perfusion metrics (Ktrans, Kep, Ve, initial area under the curve [AUC]), the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value, and normalized versions of quantitative metrics were measured and correlated with the GS.

Results

Ktrans had the highest diagnostic accuracy value of 82% among the DCE-MRI parameters (AUC 0.90), and ADC had the strongest diagnostic accuracy value of 87% among the overall parameters (AUC 0.92). The combination of ADC and Ktrans have higher diagnostic performance with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve being 0.98 (sensitivity 0.94; specificity 0.89; accuracy 0.92) compared to the individual evaluation of each parameter alone. The GS showed strong negative correlations with ADC (r = −0.72) and normalized ADC (r = −0.69) as well as a significant positive correlation with Ktrans (r = 0.69).

Conclusion

The combination of Ktrans and ADC and their normalized versions may help differentiate between ncsPCa from csPCa in the peripheral zone.

Luminal Water Imaging: Comparison With Diffusion-Weighted Imaging (DWI) and PI-RADS for Characterization of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness

BACKGROUND

Luminal water imaging (LWI), a multicomponent T₂ mapping technique, has shown promise for prostate cancer (PCa) detection and characterization.

PURPOSE

To 1) quantify LWI parameters and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in PCa and benign peripheral zone (PZ) tissues; and 2) evaluate the diagnostic performance of LWI, ADC, and PI-RADS parameters for differentiation between low- and high-grade PCa lesions.

STUDY TYPE

Prospective.

SUBJECTS

Twenty-six PCa patients undergoing prostatectomy (mean age 59 years, range 46-72 years).

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

Multiparametric MRI at 3.0T, including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and LWI T₂ mapping.

ASSESSMENT

LWI parameters and ADC were quantified in index PCa lesions and benign PZ.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Differences in MRI parameters between PCa and benign PZ were assessed using Wilcoxon signed tests. Spearman correlation of pathological grade group (GG) with LWI parameters, ADC, and PI-RADS was evaluated. The utility of each of the parameters for differentiation between low-grade (GG ≤2) and high-grade (GG ≥3) PCa was determined by Mann-Whitney U tests and ROC analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty-six index lesions were analyzed (mean size 1.7 ± 0.8 cm, GG: 1 [n = 1; 4%], 2 [n = 14, 54%], 3 [n = 8, 31%], 5 [n = 3, 12%]). LWI parameters and ADC both showed high diagnostic performance for differentiation between benign PZ and PCa (highest area under the curve [AUC] for LWI parameter T_2,short [AUC = 0.98, P < 0.001]). The LWI parameters luminal water fraction (LWF) and amplitude of long T₂ component A_long significantly correlated with GG (r = -0.441, P = 0.024 and r = -0.414, P = 0.036, respectively), while PI-RADS, ADC, and the other LWI parameters did not (P = 0.132-0.869). LWF and A_long also showed significant differences between low-grade and high-grade PCa (AUC = 0.776, P = 0.008 and AUC = 0.758, P = 0.027, respectively). Maximum diagnostic performance for discrimination of high-grade PCa was found with combined LWI parameters (AUC 0.891, P = 0.001).

DATA CONCLUSION

LWI parameters, in particular in combination, showed superior diagnostic performance for differentiation between low-grade and high-grade PCa compared to ADC and PI-RADS assessment. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;52:271-279.

Targeted Biopsy Validation of Peripheral Zone Prostate Cancer Characterization With Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting and Diffusion Mapping

OBJECTIVE

This study aims for targeted biopsy validation of magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) and diffusion mapping for characterizing peripheral zone (PZ) prostate cancer and noncancers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred four PZ lesions in 85 patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging were retrospectively analyzed with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping, MRF, and targeted biopsy (cognitive or in-gantry). A radiologist blinded to pathology drew regions of interest on targeted lesions and visually normal peripheral zone on MRF and ADC maps. Mean T1, T2, and ADC were analyzed using linear mixed models. Generalized estimating equations logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate T1 and T2 relaxometry combined with ADC in differentiating pathologic groups.

RESULTS

Targeted biopsy revealed 63 cancers (low-grade cancer/Gleason score 6 = 10, clinically significant cancer/Gleason score ≥7 = 53), 15 prostatitis, and 26 negative biopsies. Prostate cancer T1, T2, and ADC (mean ± SD, 1660 ± 270 milliseconds, 56 ± 20 milliseconds, 0.70 × 10 ± 0.24 × 10 mm/s) were significantly lower than prostatitis (mean ± SD, 1730 ± 350 milliseconds, 77 ± 36 milliseconds, 1.00 × 10 ± 0.30 × 10 mm/s) and negative biopsies (mean ± SD, 1810 ± 250 milliseconds, 71 ± 37 milliseconds, 1.00 × 10 ± 0.33 × 10 mm/s). For cancer versus prostatitis, ADC was sensitive and T2 specific with comparable area under curve (AUC; (AUCT2 = 0.71, AUCADC = 0.79, difference between AUCs not significant P = 0.37). T1 + ADC (AUCT1 + ADC = 0.83) provided the best separation between cancer and negative biopsies. Low-grade cancer T2 and ADC (mean ± SD, 75 ± 29 milliseconds, 0.96 × 10 ± 0.34 × 10 mm/s) were significantly higher than clinically significant cancers (mean ± SD, 52 ± 16 milliseconds, 0.65 ± 0.18 × 10 mm/s), and T2 + ADC (AUCT2 + ADC = 0.91) provided the best separation.

CONCLUSIONS

T1 and T2 relaxometry combined with ADC mapping may be useful for quantitative characterization of prostate cancer grades and differentiating cancer from noncancers for PZ lesions seen on T2-weighted images.

Automatic stratification of prostate tumour aggressiveness using multiparametric MRI: a horizontal comparison of texture features

Background: Previous studies have identified apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) from diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) can stratify prostate cancer into high- and low-grade disease (HG and LG, respectively). In this study, we consider the improvement of incorporating texture features (TFs) from T2-weighted (T2w) multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) relative to mpMRI alone to predict HG and LG disease. Material and methods: In vivo mpMRI was acquired from 30 patients prior to radical prostatectomy. Sequences included T2w imaging, DWI and dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) MRI. In vivo mpMRI data were co-registered with 'ground truth' histology. Tumours were delineated on the histology with Gleason scores (GSs) and classed as HG if GS ≥ 4 + 3, or LG if GS ≤ 3 + 4. Texture features based on three statistical families, namely the grey-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM), grey-level run length matrix (GLRLM) and the grey-level size zone matrix (GLSZM), were computed from T2w images. Logistic regression models were trained using different feature subsets to classify each lesion as either HG or LG. To avoid overfitting, fivefold cross validation was applied on feature selection, model training and performance evaluation. Performance of all models generated was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC) method. Results: Consistent with previous studies, ADC was found to discriminate between HG and LG with an AUC of 0.76. Of the three statistical TF families, GLCM (plus select mpMRI features including ADC) scored the highest AUC (0.84) with GLRLM plus mpMRI similarly performing well (AUC  =  0.82). When all TFs were considered in combination, an AUC of 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.87-0.95) was achieved. Conclusions: Incorporating T2w TFs significantly improved model performance for classifying prostate tumour aggressiveness. This result, however, requires further validation in a larger patient cohort.

Multiparametric MRI and radiomics in prostate cancer: a review

Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is an imaging modality that combines anatomical MR imaging with one or more functional MRI sequences. It has become a versatile tool for detecting and characterising prostate cancer (PCa). The traditional role of mpMRI was confined to PCa staging, but due to the advanced imaging techniques, its role has expanded to various stages in clinical practises including tumour detection, disease monitor during active surveillance and sequential imaging for patient follow-up. Meanwhile, with the growing speed of data generation and the increasing volume of imaging data, it is highly demanded to apply computerised methods to process mpMRI data and extract useful information. Hence quantitative analysis for imaging data using radiomics has become an emerging paradigm. The application of radiomics approaches in prostate cancer has not only enabled automatic localisation of the disease but also provided a non-invasive solution to assess tumour biology (e.g. aggressiveness and the presence of hypoxia). This article reviews mpMRI and its expanding role in PCa detection, staging and patient management. Following that, an overview of prostate radiomics will be provided, with a special focus on its current applications as well as its future directions.

The Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) is a useful biomarker in predicting metastatic colon cancer using the ADC-value of the primary tumor

Purpose

To investigate the role of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) as a potential imaging biomarker to predict metastasis (lymph node metastasis and distant metastasis) in colon cancer based on the ADC-value of the primary tumor.

Methods

Thirty patients (21M, 9F) were included retrospectively. All patients received a 1.5T MRI of the colon including T2 and DWI sequences. ADC maps were calculated for each patient. An expert reader manually delineated all colon tumors to measure mean ADC and histogram metrics (mean, min, max, median, standard deviation (SD), skewness, kurtosis, 5th-95th percentiles) were calculated. Advanced colon cancer was defined as lymph node mestastasis (N+) or distant metastasis (M+). The student Mann Whitney U-test was used to assess the differences between the ADC means of early and advanced colon cancer. To compare the accuracy of lymph node metastasis (N+) prediction based on morpholigical criteria versus ADC-value of the primary tumor, two blinded readers, determined the lymph node metastasis (N0 vs N+) based on morphological criteria. The sensitivity and specificity in predicting lymph node metastasis was calculated for both readers and for the ADC-value of the primary tumor, with histopathology results as the gold standard.

Results

There was a significant difference between the mean ADC-value of advanced versus early tumors (p = 0.002). The optimal cut off value was 1179 * 10⁻³ mm2/s with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.83 and a sensitivity and specificity of 81% and 86% respectively to predict advanced tumors. Histogram analyses did not add any significant additional value.

The sensitivity and specificity for the prediction of lymph node metastasis based on morphological criteria were 40% and 63% for reader 1 and 30% and 88% for reader 2 respectively. The primary tumor ADC-value using 1.179 * 10⁻³ mm2/s as threshold had a 100% sensitivity and specificity in predicting lymph node metastasis.

Conclusion

The ADC-value of the primary tumor has the potential to predict advanced colon cancer, defined as lymph node metastasis or distant metastasis, with lower ADC values significantly associated with advanced tumors. Furthermore the ADC-value of the primary tumor increases the prediction accuracy of lymph node metastasis compared with morphological criteria.

Correlations between Apparent Diffusion Coefficient and Gleason Score in Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Reported data regarding the associations between apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and Gleason score in prostate cancer (PC) are inconsistent.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present systematic review was to analyze relationships between ADC and Gleason score in PC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

MEDLINE library, SCOPUS, and EMBASE databases were screened for relationships between ADC and Gleason score in PC up to April 2018. Overall, 39 studies with 2457 patients were identified. Data on the following parameters were extracted from the literature: number of patients, cancer localization, and correlation coefficients between ADC and Gleason score.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Associations between ADC and Gleason score were analyzed by the Spearman's correlation coefficient.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

In overall sample, the pooled correlation coefficient between ADC and Gleason score was -0.45 (95% confidence interval [CI]=[-0.50; -0.40]). In PC in the transitional zone, the pooled correlation coefficient was -0.22 (95% CI=[-0.47; 0.03]). In PC in the peripheral zone, the pooled correlation coefficient was -0.48 (95% CI=[-0.54; -0.42]).

CONCLUSIONS

In PC located in the peripheral zone, ADC correlated moderately with Gleason score. In PC located in the transitional zone, ADC correlated weakly with Gleason score.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We reviewed studies using apparent diffusion coefficient for the prediction of Gleason score in prostate cancer patients.

Predictive role of PI-RADSv2 and ADC parameters in differentiating Gleason pattern 3 + 4 and 4 + 3 prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To compare the predictive roles of qualitative (PI-RADSv2) and quantitative assessment (ADC metrics), in differentiating Gleason pattern (GP) 3 + 4 from the more aggressive GP 4 + 3 prostate cancer (PCa) using radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen as the reference standard.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified treatment-naïve peripheral (PZ) and transitional zone (TZ) Gleason Score 7 PCa patients who underwent multiparametric 3T prostate MRI (DWI with b value of 0,1400 and where unavailable, 0,500) and subsequent RP from 2011 to 2015. For each lesion identified on MRI, a PI-RADSv2 score was assigned by a radiologist blinded to pathology data. A PI-RADSv2 score ≤ 3 was defined as "low risk," a PI-RADSv2 score ≥ 4 as "high risk" for clinically significant PCa. Mean tumor ADC (ADCT), ADC of adjacent normal tissue (ADCN), and ADCratio (ADCT/ADCN) were calculated. Stepwise regression analysis using tumor location, ADCT and ADCratio, b value, low vs. high PI-RADSv2 score was performed to differentiate GP 3 + 4 from 4 + 3.

RESULTS

119 out of 645 cases initially identified met eligibility requirements. 76 lesions were GP 3 + 4, 43 were 4 + 3. ADCratio was significantly different between the two GP groups (p = 0.001). PI-RADSv2 score ("low" vs. "high") was not significantly different between the two GP groups (p = 0.17). Regression analysis selected ADCT (p = 0.03) and ADCratio (p = 0.0007) as best predictors to differentiate GP 4 + 3 from 3 + 4. Estimated sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the predictive model in differentiating GP 4 + 3 from 3 + 4 were 37, 82, and 66%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

ADC metrics could differentiate GP 3 + 4 from 4 + 3 PCa with high specificity and moderate accuracy while PI-RADSv2, did not differentiate between these patterns.

Role of apparent diffusion coefficient values in prostate diseases characterization on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging

BACKGROUND

To evaluate if normal and pathological prostate tissue can be distinguished by using apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to understand if it is possible to differentiate among pathological prostate tissues using ADC values.

METHODS

Our population consisted in 81 patients (mean age 65.4 years) in which 84 suspicious areas were identified. Regions of interest were placed over suspicious areas, detected on MRI, and over areas with normal appearance, and ADC values were recorded. Statistical differences between ADC values of suspicious and normal areas were evaluated. Histopathological diagnosis, obtained from targeted biopsy using MRI-US fusion biopsies in 39 patients and from prostatectomy in 42 patients, were correlated to ADC values.

RESULTS

Histopathological diagnosis revealed 58 cases of prostate cancer (PCa), 19 patients with indolent PCa (Gleason Score ≤6) and 39 patients with clinically significant PCa (Gleason Score ≥7), 16 of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HG-PIN) and 10 of atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP). Significant statistical differences between mean ADC values of normal prostate tissue versus PCa (P<0.00001), HG-PIN (P<0.00001) and ASAP (P<0.00001) were found. Significant differences were observed between mean ADC values of PCa versus HG-PIN (P<0.00001) and ASAP (P<0.00001) with many overlapping values. Differences between mean ADC values of HG-PIN versus ASAP (P=0.015) were not significant. Significant differences of ADC values were also observed between patients with indolent and clinically significant PCa (P<0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

ADC values allow differentiation between normal and pathological prostate tissue and between indolent and clinically significant PCa but do not allow a definite differentiation between PCa, HG-PIN, and ASAP.

Combined Analysis of Biparametric MRI and Prostate-Specific Antigen Density: Role in the Prebiopsy Diagnosis of Gleason Score 7 or Greater Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of prebiopsy biparametric MRI (bpMRI) and prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) for Gleason score (GS) 7 or greater prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty-eight consecutive patients who underwent prebiopsy bpMRI and biopsy were included. Pathologic results of systemic and targeted biopsies were the reference standard. Qualitative analyses comprised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) and modified PI-RADSv2 (mPI-RADSv2). Quantitative analyses comprised mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) of tumor, 10th percentile ADC of tumor, mean ADC ratio (ADCR) between benign tissues and PCa, and 10th percentile ADCR between benign tissues and PCa. The AUCs of the following combined models for GS 7 or greater PCa were investigated: model 1, PSAD and PI-RADSv2; model 2, PSAD and mPI-RADSv2; model 3, PSAD and mean ADC; model 4, PSAD and 10th percentile ADC; model 5, PSAD and mean ADCR; and model 6, PSAD and 10th percentile ADCR.

RESULTS

The rate of GS 7 or greater PCa was 45.6% (31/68). AUCs of bpMRI parameters were 0.816 for PI-RADSv2, 0.838 for mPI-RADSv2, 0.820 for mean ADC, 0.823 for 10th percentile ADC, 0.780 for mean ADCR, and 0.763 for 10th percentile ADCR (p > 0.05 in all comparisons), whereas AUCs of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based parameters were 0.650 for PSA and 0.745 for PSAD (PSA vs PSAD, p = 0.017). AUCs of the combined models from 1 to 6 were 0.860, 0.880, 0.837, 0.844, 0.811, and 0.806, respectively, for biopsy GS 7 or greater PCa (p > 0.05 in all comparisons).

CONCLUSION

Combined analysis of prebiopsy bpMRI and PSAD is useful for identifying GS 7 or greater PCa.

Utility of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient measurements and normalized apparent diffusion coefficient ratios in the diagnosis of clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the utility of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements and normalized ADC ratios in multiparametric MRI for the diagnosis of clinically significant peripheral zone (PZ) prostate cancer particularly among equivocally suspicious prostate lesions.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 95 patients with PZ lesions by PI-RADSv2 criteria, and who underwent subsequent MRI-US fusion biopsy, was approved by an institutional review board. Two radiologists independently measured ADC values in regions of interest (ROIs) of PZ lesions and calculated normalized ADC ratio based on ROIs in the bladder lumen. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using ROC. Inter observer variability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

Mean ADC and normalized ADC ratios for clinically significant and non-clinically significant lesions were 0.763 × 10-3 mm² s^-1, 29.8%; and 1.135 × 10-3 mm² s^-1, 47.2% (p < 0.001), respectively. Area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.880 [95% CI (0.816-0.944) and 0.885 (95% CI (0.814-0.955)] for ADC and ADC ratio, respectively. Optimal AUC threshold for ADC was 0.843 × 10-3 mm² s^-1 (Sn 70.5%, Sp 88.2%) and for normalized ADC was 33.1% (Sn 75.0%, Sp 95.7%). intraclass correlation coefficient was high at 0.889.

CONCLUSION

Quantitative ADC measurement in PZ prostate lesions demonstrates excellent diagnostic performance in differentiating clinically significant from non-clinically significant prostate cancer with high inter observer correlation. Advances In knowledge: Quantitative ADC is presented as an additional method to evaluate lesions in mpMRI of the prostate. This technique may be incorporated in new and existing methods to improve detection and discrimination of clinically significant 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

PURPOSE

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.

METHODS

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 to 2015. Using 3D slicer, areas of suspected tumor (T) and normal tissue (N) on ADC (b = 0, 1400) were outlined volumetrically. Mean ADC_T, mean ADC_N, ADC_ratio (ADC_T/ADC_N) 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 >0.5 cc. 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).

RESULTS

Eighty five cases met eligibility requirements. Diagnostic performances (AUC) in identifying csPC using three definitions were: (A) ADC_T (0.83) was higher than PI-RADSv2 (0.65, p = 0.006); (B) ADC_T (0.86) was higher than ADC_ratio (0.68, p < 0.001), and PI-RADSv2 (0.70, p = 0.04); (C) PI-RADSv2 (0.73) performed better than ADC_ratio (0.56, p = 0.02). ADC_T performance was higher when csPC was defined by A or B versus C (p = 0.038 and p = 0.01, respectively). ADC_ratio performed better when csPC was defined by A versus C (p = 0.01). PI-RADSv2 performance was not affected by csPC definition.

CONCLUSIONS

When csPC was defined by GS, ADC parameters provided better csPC discrimination than PI-RADSv2, with ADC_T providing best result. When csPC was defined by MRI-calculated volume, PI-RADSv2 provided better discrimination than ADC_ratio. csPC definition did not affect PI-RADSv2 diagnostic performance.

New prostate cancer prognostic grade group (PGG): Can multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) accurately separate patients with low-, intermediate-, and high-grade cancer?

PURPOSE

Our objective is to determine the accuracy of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in predicting pathologic grade of prostate cancer (PCa) after radical prostatectomy (RP) using simple apparent diffusion coefficient metrics and, specifically, whether mpMRI can accurately separate disease into one of two risk categories (low vs. higher grade) or one of three risk categories (low, intermediate, or high grade) corresponding to the new prognostic grade group (PGG) criteria.

METHODS

This retrospective, HIPAA-compliant, IRB-approved study included 140 patients with PCa who underwent 3 T mpMRI with endorectal coil and transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS-G) biopsy before RP. MpMRI was used to classify lesions using a two-tier (low-grade/PGG 1 vs. high-grade/PGG 2-5) or a three-tier system (low-grade/PGG 1 vs. intermediate-grade/PGG 2 vs. high-grade/PGG 3-5). Accuracy of mpMRI was compared against RP for each system.

RESULTS

The predictive accuracy of mpMRI using the two-tier system is higher than when using three-tier system (0.77 and 0.45, respectively). There were similar rates of undergrading between mpMRI and TRUS-G biopsy compared to RP (16% & 21%; respectively); rate of overgrading was higher for mpMRI vs. TRUS-G biopsy compared to RP (42% & 17%, respectively). When mpMRI and TRUS-G biopsy are combined, rate of undergrading is 1.4% and overgrading is 11%.

CONCLUSIONS

MpMRI predictive accuracy is higher when using a two-tier vs. a three-tier system, suggesting that advanced metrics may be necessary to delineate intermediate- from high-grade disease. Rates of under- and overgrading decreased when mpMRI and TRUS-G biopsy are combined, suggesting that these techniques may be complementary in predicting tumor grade.

Evaluation of Peripheral Zone Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness Using the Ratio of Diffusion Tensor Imaging Measures

Purpose

To evaluate the aggressiveness of peripheral zone prostate cancer by correlating the Gleason score (GS) with the ratio of the diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) measures.

Materials and Methods

Forty-two peripheral zone prostate tumors were imaged using DTI. Regions of interest focusing on the center of tumor foci and noncancerous tissue were used to extract statistical measures of mean diffusivity (MD) and fractional anisotroy (FA). Measure ratio was calculated by dividing tumor measure by noncancerous tissue measure.

Results

Strong correlations are observable between GS and MD measures while weak correlations are present between GS and FA measures. Minimum tumor MD (MD_min) and the ratio of minimum MD (rMD_min) show the same highest correlation with GS (both ρ = −0.73). Between GS ≤ 7 (3 + 4) and GS ≥ 7 (4 + 3), differences are significant for all MD measures but for some FA measures. MD measures perform better than FA measures in discriminating GS ≥ 7 (4 + 3).

Conclusion

Ratios of MD measures can be used in evaluation of peripheral zone prostate cancer aggressiveness; however tumor MD measures alone perform similarly.

The value of advanced MRI techniques in the assessment of cervical cancer: a review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the value of new magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques in cervical cancer.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and MEDLINE and reviewed articles published from 1990 to 2016 to identify studies that used MRI techniques, such as diffusion weighted imaging (DWI), intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) and dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) MRI, to assess parametric invasion, to detect lymph node metastases, tumour subtype and grading, and to detect and predict tumour recurrence.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine studies were included. The additional use of DWI improved the accuracy and sensitivity of the evaluation of parametrial extension. Most studies reported improved detection of nodal metastases. Functional MRI techniques have the potential to assess tumour subtypes and tumour grade differentiation, and they showed additional value in detecting and predicting treatment response. Limitations included a lack of technical standardisation, which limits reproducibility.

CONCLUSIONS

New advanced MRI techniques allow improved analysis of tumour biology and the tumour microenvironment. They can improve TNM staging and show promise for tumour classification and for assessing the risk of tumour recurrence. They may be helpful for developing optimised and personalised therapy for patients with cervical cancer.

TEACHING POINTS

• Conventional MRI plays a key role in the evaluation of cervical cancer. • DWI improves tumour delineation and detection of nodal metastases in cervical cancer. • Advanced MRI techniques show promise regarding histological grading and subtype differentiation. • Tumour ADC is a potential biomarker for response to treatment.

Head-To-Head Comparison Between High- and Standard-b-Value DWI for Detecting Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to perform a head-to-head comparison between high-b-value (> 1000 s/mm²) and standard-b-value (800-1000 s/mm²) DWI regarding diagnostic performance in the detection of prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched up to April 1, 2017. The analysis included diagnostic accuracy studies in which high- and standard-b-value DWI were used for prostate cancer detection with histopathologic examination as the reference standard. Methodologic quality was assessed with the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. Sensitivity and specificity of all studies were calculated and were pooled and plotted in a hierarchic summary ROC plot. Meta-regression and multiple-subgroup analyses were performed to compare the diagnostic performances of high- and standard-b-value DWI.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (789 patients) were included. High-b-value DWI had greater pooled sensitivity (0.80 [95% CI, 0.70-0.87]) (p = 0.03) and specificity (0.92 [95% CI, 0.87-0.95]) (p = 0.01) than standard-b-value DWI (sensitivity, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.66-0.86]); specificity, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.77-0.93] (p < 0.01). Multiple-subgroup analyses showed that specificity was consistently higher for high- than for standard-b-value DWI (p ≤ 0.05). Sensitivity was significantly higher for high- than for standard-b-value DWI only in the following subgroups: peripheral zone only, transition zone only, multiparametric protocol (DWI and T2-weighted imaging), visual assessment of DW images, and per-lesion analysis (p ≤ 0.04).

CONCLUSION

In a head-to-head comparison, high-b-value DWI had significantly better sensitivity and specificity for detection of prostate cancer than did standard-b-value DWI. Multiple-subgroup analyses showed that specificity was consistently superior for high-b-value DWI.

Monitoring Tumor Volume in Patients With Prostate Cancer Undergoing Active Surveillance: Is MRI Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Indicative of Tumor Growth?

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to measure longitudinal change in tumor volume of the dominant intraprostatic lesion and determine whether baseline apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and change in ADC are indicative of tumor growth in patients with prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

The study group included 151 men (mean age, 68.1 ± 7.4 [SD] years; range, 50-83 years) undergoing active surveillance with 3D whole prostate, zonal, and tumor volumetric findings documented at endorectal MRI examinations performed at two time points (median interval, 1.9 years). Tumor (location confirmed at transrectal ultrasound or template biopsy) ADC was measured on the slice with the largest lesion. Twenty randomly selected patients had the measurements repeated by the same observer after a greater than 4-month interval, and the limits of agreement of measurements were calculated. Tumor volume increases greater than the upper limit of agreement were designated measurable growth, and their baseline ADCs and change in ADC were compared with those of tumors without measurable growth (independent-samples t test).

RESULTS

Fifty-two (34.4%) tumors increased measurably in volume. Baseline ADC and tumor volume were negatively correlated (r = -0.42, p = 0.001). Baseline ADC values did not differ between those with and those without measurable growth (p = 0.06), but change in ADC was significantly different (-6.8% ± 12.3% for those with measurable growth vs 0.23% ± 10.1% for those without, p = 0.0005). Percentage change in tumor volume and percentage change in ADC were negatively correlated (r = -0.31, p = 0.0001). A 5.8% reduction in ADC indicated a measurable increase in tumor volume with 54.9% sensitivity and 77.0% specificity (AUC, 0.67).

CONCLUSION

Tumor volume increased measurably in 34.4% of men after 2 years of active surveillance. Change in ADC may be used to identify tumors with measurable growth.

Risk Stratification Among Men With Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 Category 3 Transition Zone Lesions: Is Biopsy Always Necessary?

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to determine the clinical and MRI characteristics of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCA) (Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4) in men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) category 3 transition zone (TZ) lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2014 to 2016, 865 men underwent prostate MRI and MRI/ultrasound (US) fusion biopsy (FB). A subset of 90 FB-naïve men with 96 PI-RADSv2 category 3 TZ lesions was identified. Patients were imaged at 3 T using a body coil. Images were assigned a PI-RADSv2 category by an experienced radiologist. Using clinical data and imaging features, we performed univariate and multivariate analyses to identify predictors of clinically significant PCA.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 66 years, and the mean prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) was 0.13 ng/mL². PCA was detected in 34 of 96 (35%) lesions, 14 of which (15%) harbored clinically significant PCA. In univariate analysis, DWI score, prostate volume, and PSAD were significant predictors (p < 0.05) of clinically significant PCA with a suggested significance for apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and prostate-specific antigen value (p < 0.10). On multivariate analysis, PSAD and lesion ADC were the most important covariates. The combination of both PSAD of 0.15 ng/mL² or greater and an ADC value of less than 1000 mm²/s yielded an AUC of 0.91 for clinically significant PCA (p < 0.001). If FB had been restricted to these criteria, only 10 of 90 men would have undergone biopsy, resulting in diagnosis of clinically significant PCA in 60% with eight men (9%) misdiagnosed (false-negative).

CONCLUSION

The yield of FB in men with PI-RADSv2 category 3 TZ lesions for clinically significant PCA is 15% but significantly improves to 60% (AUC > 0.9) among men with PSAD of 0.15 ng/mL² or greater and lesion ADC value of less than 1000 mm²/s.