Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate: should we use quantitative metrics to better characterize focal lesions originating in the peripheral zone?

PURPOSE: To compare inter-reader concordance and accuracy of qualitative diffusion-weighted (DW) PIRADSv2.0 score with those of quantitative DW-MRI for the diagnosis of peripheral zone prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two radiologists independently assigned a DW-MRI-PIRADS score to 92 PZ-foci, in 74 patients (64.3±5.6 years old; median PSA level: 8 ng/ml, normal DRE in 70 men). A standardised ADCmean and nine ADC-derived parameters were measured, including ADCratios with the whole-prostate (WP-ADCratio) or the mirror-PZ (mirror-ADCratio) as reference areas. Surgical histology and MRI-TRUS fusion-biopsy were the reference for tumours and benign foci, respectively. Inter-reader agreement was assessed by the Cohen-kappa-coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Univariate-multivariate regressions determined the most predictive factor for cancer.

RESULTS: Fifty lesions were malignant. Inter-reader concordance was fair for qualitative assessment, but excellent for quantitative assessment for all quantitative variables. At univariate analysis, ADCmean, WP-ADCratio and WL-ADCmean performed equally, but significantly better than the mirror-ADCratio (p<0.001). At multivariate analysis, the only independent variable significantly associated with malignancy was the whole-prostate-ADCratio. At a cut-off value of 0.68, sensitivity was 94-90 % and specificity was 60-38 % for readers 1 and 2, respectively.

CONCLUSION: The whole-prostate-ADCratio improved the qualitative inter-reader concordance and characterisation of focal PZ-lesions.

KEY POINTS: • Inter-reader concordance of DW PI-RADSv2.0 score for PZ lesions was only fair. • Using a standardised ADCmean measurement and derived DW-quantitative parameters, concordance was excellent. • The whole-prostate ADCratio performed significantly better than the mirror-ADCratio for cancer detection. • At a cut-off of 0.68, sensitivity values of WP-ADCratio were 94-90 %. • The whole-prostate ADCratio may circumvent variations of ADC metrics across centres.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app