Comparison Between Gleason Score and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Obtained from Diffusion-Weighted Imaging of Prostate Cancer Patients

Caivano, Rocchina; Rabasco, Paola; Lotumolo, Antonella; Cirillo, Patrizia; D’Antuono, Felice; Zandolino, Alexis; Villonio, Antonio; Macarini, Luca; Salvatore, Marco; Cammarota, Aldo

doi:10.3109/07357907.2013.845673

Cited by 17 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The T 2 of blood is approximately 280 ms and largely independent of field strength (58). Signal fractions calculated from Equation [16] using these figures are given in Table 1. It is not simple to obtain independent estimates of ductal, stromal, and epithelial diffusion coefficients in vivo.…”

Section: Model Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

A model describing diffusion in prostate cancer

Gilani

Malcolm

Johnson

2016

Magnetic Resonance in Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Model Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

A model describing diffusion in prostate cancer

Gilani

Malcolm

Johnson

2016

Magnetic Resonance in Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Gleason score acquired from biopsy or surgery on the prostate is important for the evaluation of PCa aggressiveness, selection of clinical treatment options and assessment of prognosis (6). Several studies have investigated the correlation between the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value obtained from the DWI sequence and Gleason score noninvasively, however a consensus is yet to be reached on this (7)(8)(9).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlation of diffusion tensor imaging parameters and Gleason scores of prostate cancer

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The aim of the present study was to explore the association between the parameters of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), including fractional anisotropy (FA) values, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values and the diffusion tensor tractography (DTT) map, with the Gleason score of prostate cancer (PCa). A retrospective study of 50 cases of PCa confirmed by biopsy or surgical pathology was performed. Conventional magnetic resonance imaging and DTI scans were conducted in these cases. The 50 cases of PCa were divided into three groups, including low, intermediate and high grade, according to the Gleason score. Post-DTI processing was performed using Neuro 3D software, in order to measure the FA and ADC values, and map the prostate fibers. Differences in FA and ADC values among the various PCa groups were examined using analysis of variance, while the correlation of FA and ADC values with the Gleason score was studied using Pearson correlation analysis. The obtained DTT map clearly demonstrated the spatial structure of the prostate fibers. The fibers of the cancer area were dense without interruption in the low-grade group, sparse and disordered in the intermediate-grade group, and were disordered, sparse or even absent in the high-grade group. The FA values were 0.284±0.313, 0.293±0.347 and 0.369±0.347, respectively, with statistically significant differences observed among the three groups (F=234.533; P<0.05) and between each group (P<0.05). In addition, the FA value of PCa was positively correlated with the Gleason score (r=0.884; P<0.05). The ADC values of the low-, intermediate-and high-grade groups were 1.070±0.072x10 , respectively, which demonstrated statistically significant differences among the three groups (F=49.987; P<0.05) and between each group (P<0.05). Furthermore, the ADC values of PCa were negatively correlated with Gleason score (r=-0.810; P<0.05). In conclusion, there was an association between DTI parameters and Gleason score, which may be used to evaluate the grading and prognosis of PCa.

show abstract

“…This finding was consistent with earlier studies that reported that ADC values may be useful in differentiating patients with high-or intermediate-risk prostate cancer from those with a low risk prostate cancer. 16,[23][24][25][26] In addition, several previous studies have demonstrated that high GS disease has a lower ADC value than that of low GS disease. Specifically, Nagarajan et al 17 compared ADC values with three groups of /s).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between Gleason score and apparent diffusion coefficients of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer patients

Kim¹,

Kim²,

Park³

et al. 2016

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:We assessed the correlation between the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and pathological Gleason score (GS) of prostate cancer patients. Methods: A total of 125 patients who underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging before radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer were included in this study. ADC values were compared with different GS. We used receiver operating characteristic analysis and determined the ADC cutoff value to differentiate tumours with a GS of 6 from those with a GS ≥7. Results: We identified 34 patients (27.2%) with a GS of 6; 33 patients (26.4%) with a GS of 7; 22 patients (17.6%) with a GS of 8; and 36 patients (28.8%) with a GS of ≥9. The mean ADC value for disease with a GS of 6 was 0.914 ± 0.161 x10 -3 mm 2 /s; GS of 7: 0.741 ± 0.164 x10 2 /s was the best cutoff value to identify prostate cancer with a GS of 6. Conclusions: We observed an inverse relationship between GS and ADC value. Moreover, a cutoff ADC value may help differentiate disease with a GS of 6 from disease with a GS ≥7.

show abstract

Comparison Between Gleason Score and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Obtained from Diffusion-Weighted Imaging of Prostate Cancer Patients

Abstract: The ADC values may help clinicians to delineate prostate carcinoma, recognizing its high- or low-grade compartments.

Cited by 17 publications

References 28 publications

A model describing diffusion in prostate cancer

A model describing diffusion in prostate cancer

Correlation of diffusion tensor imaging parameters and Gleason scores of prostate cancer

Relationship between Gleason score and apparent diffusion coefficients of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About