What is the most effective tool for detecting prostate cancer using a standard MR scanner?

Kei Osugi, Akihiro Tanimoto, Jun Nakashima, Kazunobu Shinoda, Akinori Hashiguchi, Mototsugu Oya, Masahiro Jinzaki, Sachio Kuribayashi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: We aimed to determine which of the following magnetic resonance (MR) imaging sequences is most effective for detecting prostate cancer: T2-weighted (T2W), dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) T1-weighted (T1W), or diffusion-weighted (DWI) imaging or apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping. Materials and Methods: We included 37 male patients with prostate cancer who underwent MR imaging before radical prostatectomy in this retrospective study. Sixty-four foci (>5 mm in size; 35 in the peripheral zone [PZ], 29 in the transitional zone [TZ]) were histopathologically determined to be prostate cancer. We determined the capacity of T2W, DCE-T1W, DWI, ADC mapping alone, and the combination of ADC mapping with DWI, and conventional MR sequences to detect prostate cancer, including their sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV), with reference to the results obtained in histopathological examinations of whole-mount sections. Results: In the PZ, sensitivities were 31.4% (T2W), 37.1% (DCE-T1W), 51.4% (DWI), and 71.4% (ADC mapping); PPVs were 78.6% (T2W), 92.9% (DCE-T1W), 94.7% (DWI), and 96.0% (ADC mapping). Sensitivity was significantly higher of ADC mapping than other sequences. In the TZ, sensitivities were 55.1% (T2W), 44.8% (DCE-T1W), 82.8% (DWI), and 89.7% (ADC mapping); PPVs were 64.0% (T2W), 46.4% (DCE-T1W), 70.6% (DWI), and 72.2% (ADC mapping). Sensitivity was significantly higher of ADC mapping and DWI than conventional MR imaging, but there was no significant correlation between DWI/ADC mapping and T2W/DCE-T1W with respect to PPVs. Combining sequences did not improve sensitivity; only the PPV in the TZ improved when ADC mapping was combined with DCE-T1W. Conclusion: ADC mapping is the most effective standard MR imaging tool for detecting prostate cancer. The addition of DCE-T1W may improve the PPV of ADC mapping for diagnosing cancer in the TZ.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)271-280
Number of pages10
JournalMagnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences
Volume12
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Prostatic Neoplasms
Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Prostatectomy

Keywords

  • Apparent diffusion coefficient
  • Diffusion-weighted imaging
  • Prostate cancer

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

What is the most effective tool for detecting prostate cancer using a standard MR scanner? / Osugi, Kei; Tanimoto, Akihiro; Nakashima, Jun; Shinoda, Kazunobu; Hashiguchi, Akinori; Oya, Mototsugu; Jinzaki, Masahiro; Kuribayashi, Sachio.

In: Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences, Vol. 12, No. 4, 2013, p. 271-280.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{92d86a2b11004aeebb41a3816f9f5bbb,
title = "What is the most effective tool for detecting prostate cancer using a standard MR scanner?",
abstract = "Purpose: We aimed to determine which of the following magnetic resonance (MR) imaging sequences is most effective for detecting prostate cancer: T2-weighted (T2W), dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) T1-weighted (T1W), or diffusion-weighted (DWI) imaging or apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping. Materials and Methods: We included 37 male patients with prostate cancer who underwent MR imaging before radical prostatectomy in this retrospective study. Sixty-four foci (>5 mm in size; 35 in the peripheral zone [PZ], 29 in the transitional zone [TZ]) were histopathologically determined to be prostate cancer. We determined the capacity of T2W, DCE-T1W, DWI, ADC mapping alone, and the combination of ADC mapping with DWI, and conventional MR sequences to detect prostate cancer, including their sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV), with reference to the results obtained in histopathological examinations of whole-mount sections. Results: In the PZ, sensitivities were 31.4{\%} (T2W), 37.1{\%} (DCE-T1W), 51.4{\%} (DWI), and 71.4{\%} (ADC mapping); PPVs were 78.6{\%} (T2W), 92.9{\%} (DCE-T1W), 94.7{\%} (DWI), and 96.0{\%} (ADC mapping). Sensitivity was significantly higher of ADC mapping than other sequences. In the TZ, sensitivities were 55.1{\%} (T2W), 44.8{\%} (DCE-T1W), 82.8{\%} (DWI), and 89.7{\%} (ADC mapping); PPVs were 64.0{\%} (T2W), 46.4{\%} (DCE-T1W), 70.6{\%} (DWI), and 72.2{\%} (ADC mapping). Sensitivity was significantly higher of ADC mapping and DWI than conventional MR imaging, but there was no significant correlation between DWI/ADC mapping and T2W/DCE-T1W with respect to PPVs. Combining sequences did not improve sensitivity; only the PPV in the TZ improved when ADC mapping was combined with DCE-T1W. Conclusion: ADC mapping is the most effective standard MR imaging tool for detecting prostate cancer. The addition of DCE-T1W may improve the PPV of ADC mapping for diagnosing cancer in the TZ.",
keywords = "Apparent diffusion coefficient, Diffusion-weighted imaging, Prostate cancer",
author = "Kei Osugi and Akihiro Tanimoto and Jun Nakashima and Kazunobu Shinoda and Akinori Hashiguchi and Mototsugu Oya and Masahiro Jinzaki and Sachio Kuribayashi",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.2463/mrms.2012-0054",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "271--280",
journal = "Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences",
issn = "1347-3182",
publisher = "Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What is the most effective tool for detecting prostate cancer using a standard MR scanner?

AU - Osugi, Kei

AU - Tanimoto, Akihiro

AU - Nakashima, Jun

AU - Shinoda, Kazunobu

AU - Hashiguchi, Akinori

AU - Oya, Mototsugu

AU - Jinzaki, Masahiro

AU - Kuribayashi, Sachio

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Purpose: We aimed to determine which of the following magnetic resonance (MR) imaging sequences is most effective for detecting prostate cancer: T2-weighted (T2W), dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) T1-weighted (T1W), or diffusion-weighted (DWI) imaging or apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping. Materials and Methods: We included 37 male patients with prostate cancer who underwent MR imaging before radical prostatectomy in this retrospective study. Sixty-four foci (>5 mm in size; 35 in the peripheral zone [PZ], 29 in the transitional zone [TZ]) were histopathologically determined to be prostate cancer. We determined the capacity of T2W, DCE-T1W, DWI, ADC mapping alone, and the combination of ADC mapping with DWI, and conventional MR sequences to detect prostate cancer, including their sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV), with reference to the results obtained in histopathological examinations of whole-mount sections. Results: In the PZ, sensitivities were 31.4% (T2W), 37.1% (DCE-T1W), 51.4% (DWI), and 71.4% (ADC mapping); PPVs were 78.6% (T2W), 92.9% (DCE-T1W), 94.7% (DWI), and 96.0% (ADC mapping). Sensitivity was significantly higher of ADC mapping than other sequences. In the TZ, sensitivities were 55.1% (T2W), 44.8% (DCE-T1W), 82.8% (DWI), and 89.7% (ADC mapping); PPVs were 64.0% (T2W), 46.4% (DCE-T1W), 70.6% (DWI), and 72.2% (ADC mapping). Sensitivity was significantly higher of ADC mapping and DWI than conventional MR imaging, but there was no significant correlation between DWI/ADC mapping and T2W/DCE-T1W with respect to PPVs. Combining sequences did not improve sensitivity; only the PPV in the TZ improved when ADC mapping was combined with DCE-T1W. Conclusion: ADC mapping is the most effective standard MR imaging tool for detecting prostate cancer. The addition of DCE-T1W may improve the PPV of ADC mapping for diagnosing cancer in the TZ.

AB - Purpose: We aimed to determine which of the following magnetic resonance (MR) imaging sequences is most effective for detecting prostate cancer: T2-weighted (T2W), dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) T1-weighted (T1W), or diffusion-weighted (DWI) imaging or apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping. Materials and Methods: We included 37 male patients with prostate cancer who underwent MR imaging before radical prostatectomy in this retrospective study. Sixty-four foci (>5 mm in size; 35 in the peripheral zone [PZ], 29 in the transitional zone [TZ]) were histopathologically determined to be prostate cancer. We determined the capacity of T2W, DCE-T1W, DWI, ADC mapping alone, and the combination of ADC mapping with DWI, and conventional MR sequences to detect prostate cancer, including their sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV), with reference to the results obtained in histopathological examinations of whole-mount sections. Results: In the PZ, sensitivities were 31.4% (T2W), 37.1% (DCE-T1W), 51.4% (DWI), and 71.4% (ADC mapping); PPVs were 78.6% (T2W), 92.9% (DCE-T1W), 94.7% (DWI), and 96.0% (ADC mapping). Sensitivity was significantly higher of ADC mapping than other sequences. In the TZ, sensitivities were 55.1% (T2W), 44.8% (DCE-T1W), 82.8% (DWI), and 89.7% (ADC mapping); PPVs were 64.0% (T2W), 46.4% (DCE-T1W), 70.6% (DWI), and 72.2% (ADC mapping). Sensitivity was significantly higher of ADC mapping and DWI than conventional MR imaging, but there was no significant correlation between DWI/ADC mapping and T2W/DCE-T1W with respect to PPVs. Combining sequences did not improve sensitivity; only the PPV in the TZ improved when ADC mapping was combined with DCE-T1W. Conclusion: ADC mapping is the most effective standard MR imaging tool for detecting prostate cancer. The addition of DCE-T1W may improve the PPV of ADC mapping for diagnosing cancer in the TZ.

KW - Apparent diffusion coefficient

KW - Diffusion-weighted imaging

KW - Prostate cancer

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84891513323&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84891513323&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2463/mrms.2012-0054

DO - 10.2463/mrms.2012-0054

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 271

EP - 280

JO - Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences

JF - Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences

SN - 1347-3182

IS - 4

ER -