Application of apparent diffusion coefficient to identify low- and
medium-high-grade prostate cancer

doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-1245.2022.04.012

International Medicine and Health Guidance News ›› 2022, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (4): 492-496.DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-1245.2022.04.012

• Scientific Research • Previous Articles Next Articles

Application of apparent diffusion coefficient to identify low- and medium-high-grade prostate cancer

Zhang Subo^1,2, Xu Yongjun¹, Liu Jingfang¹, Xia Jiabao¹, Zhang Haijun¹

¹Department of Medical Imaging, Lianyungang Hospital Affiliated of Jiangsu University (The Second People's Hospital of Lianyungang), Lianyungang 222000, China;
²Department of Medical Imaging, The People's Hospital of Khorgos, Khorgos 835221, China

Received:2021-10-27 Online:2022-02-15 Published:2022-03-15
Contact: Xu Yongjun, Email: z15161309079@126.com
Supported by:
Clinical Medical Science and Technology Development Fund Project of Jiangsu University (JLY2021089)

表观扩散系数鉴别低及中高级别前列腺癌的应用价值

张苏波^1,2 徐永军¹ 刘静芳¹ 夏加宝¹ 张海军¹

¹江苏大学附属连云港医院连云港市第二人民医院影像科，连云港　222000；
²伊犁哈萨克自治州霍尔果斯市人民医院影像科，霍尔果斯　835221

通讯作者: 徐永军，Email：z15161309079@126.com
基金资助:
江苏大学临床医学科技发展基金项目（JLY2021089）

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective　To investigate the application value of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in identifying low grade from medium-high-grade prostate cancer. Methods　MRI examinations of patients with pathologically confirmed prostate cancer with an average age of 65 years old in The Second People's Hospital of Lianyungang from March 2017 to June 2021 were collected. According to the postoperative pathological findings, they were divided into a low-grade group (Gleason score ≤6, 20 cases) and a medium-high-grade group (Gleason score ≥7, 38 cases). All patients underwent complete MRI scan and diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) examination, and the minimum ADC (ADCmin), mean ADC (ADCmean), and normalized ADC (ADCn) values of the lesions were measured respectively, and the differences in ADCmin, ADCmean, and ADCn values between the two groups were compared by independent sample t test. The receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs) of three different ADC values for identifying prostate cancer were plotted, and the area under the curve (AUC) was obtained to evaluate the effectiveness of each index in the differential diagnosis of low-grade and medium-high-grade prostate cancer. The Z test was used to compare the differences of AUCs. Results　The ADCmin, ADCmean, and ADCn values of the low-grade group were (0.734±0.063) ×10^-3 mm²/s, (0.816±0.091) ×10^-3 mm²/s, and (0.631±0.037) ×10^-3 mm²/s, respectively, which were higher than those in the medium-high-grade group [(0.646±0.055) ×10^-3 mm²/s, (0.698±0.059) ×10^-3 mm²/s, and (0.570±0.023) ×10^-3 mm²/s], with statistically significant differences (all P<0.05). The AUC of three ADC values in differentiating pathological grade of prostate cancer was 0.919 of ADCn, 0.867 of ADCmin, and 0.809 of ADCmean. Conclusions　ADCmin, ADCmean, and ADCn all can be used to identify low grade from medium-high-grade prostate cancer, among which ADCn has the highest efficacy and can provide a reasonable imaging basis for clinical selection of treatment plans.

Key words: Prostate cancer, Apparent diffusion coefficient, Normalized apparent diffusion coefficient, Gleason score

摘要： 目的　探讨表观扩散系数（ADC）鉴别低、中高级别前列腺癌的应用价值。方法　收集2017年3月至2021年6月经连云港市第二人民医院病理证实的58例前列腺癌患者的磁共振成像（MRI）检查资料，平均年龄65岁。根据术后病理结果分为低级别组（Gleason评分≤6分，20例）和中高级别组（Gleason评分≥7分，38例）。所有患者均行完善的MRI平扫及扩散加权成像（DWI）检查，分别测量癌灶的最小ADC值（ADCmin）、平均ADC值（ADCmean）、标准化ADC值（ADCn），采用独立样本t检验比较两组间ADCmin、ADCmean、ADCn差异；绘制3种不同ADC值鉴别前列腺癌病理分级的受试者工作特征曲线（ROC），获取曲线下面积（AUC），评估各指标鉴别诊断低级别和中高级别前列腺癌的效能。采用Z检验比较各AUC之间差异。结果　低级别组ADCmin、ADCmean、ADCn值分别为（0.734±0.063）×10^-3mm²/s、（0.816±0.091）×10^-3mm²/s、（0.631±0.037）×10^-3mm²/s，均高于中高级别组（0.646±0.055）×10^-3mm²/s、（0.698±0.059）×10^-3mm²/s、（0.570±0.023）×10^-3mm²/s，差异均有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。3种ADC值鉴别前列腺癌病理分级的AUC由高到低依次为ADCn 0.919、ADCmin 0.867、ADCmean 0.809。结论　ADCmin、ADCmean、ADCn均可以用来鉴别低、中高级别前列腺癌，其中ADCn效能更为显著，可为临床选择治疗方案提供合理的影像依据。

关键词: 前列腺癌, 表观扩散系数, 标准化表观扩散系数, Gleason评分

Zhang Subo, Xu Yongjun, Liu Jingfang, Xia Jiabao, Zhang Haijun. Application of apparent diffusion coefficient to identify low- and medium-high-grade prostate cancer[J]. International Medicine and Health Guidance News, 2022, 28(4): 492-496.

张苏波, 徐永军, 刘静芳, 夏加宝, 张海军. 表观扩散系数鉴别低及中高级别前列腺癌的应用价值[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2022, 28(4): 492-496.

References

[1] Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A.Cancer statistics, 2017[J].CA Cancer J Clin, 2017,67(1):7-30. DOI:10.3322/caac.20073.

[2] 张胜捷,姜伟,袁逸民,等. 改良Gleason评分系统在前列腺癌术后患者预后评估中的意义[J]. 中华泌尿外科杂志,2016,37(5):344-348. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6702.2016. 05.007.

[3] 周祥福.2018版欧洲泌尿外科前列腺癌指南要点解读[J/CD].中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版),2018,12(5):289-294. DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2018. 05.001.

[4] 顾成元,秦晓健,黄永墙,等. 我国部分省市前列腺癌精准筛查初步结果分析[J]. 中华医学杂志,2019,99(42):3292-3297. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0376-2491.2019. 42.004.

[5] 宋震宇,胡华,刘勇,等. 前列腺癌ADC值与Gleason评分及Ki-67、P53蛋白表达的相关性[J]. 中国医学影像技术,2019,35(2):236-239. DOI:10.13929/j.1003- 3289.201806056.

[6] Wu X, Reinikainen P, Vanhanen A, et al. Correlation between apparent diffusion coefficient value on diffusion-weighted MR imaging and Gleason score in prostate cancer[J].Diagn Interv Imaging,2017,98(1):63-71. DOI:10.1016/j.diii.2016.08.009.

[7] Sokmen BK, Sokmen D, Ucar N, et al. The correlation between biological activity and diffusion-weighted MR imaging and ADC value in cases with prostate cancer[J].Arch Ital Urol Androl,2017,89(4):277-281. DOI:10.4081/aiua.2017.4.277. PMID: 29473377.

[8] 赵素红,郭卫华,陈佩佩,等. DWI最小表观扩散系数诊断乳腺导管内癌和浸润性癌的价值[J]. 实用放射学杂志,2018,34(5):686-689. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-1671.2018. 05.010.

[9] 王亚婷,陈伟,张晰,等. 表观扩散系数最小值和平均值与肾透明细胞癌病理分级的相关性研究[J]. 实用放射学杂志,2019,35(12):1974-1977. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002- 1671. 2019.12.021.

[10] 漆万银,程勇,杨述根. 扩散加权成像评估子宫内膜癌淋巴血管间隙侵犯的价值[J]. 放射学实践,2021,36(2):222-226. DOI:10.13609/j.cnki.1000-0313.2021.02.014.

[11] 陈伟,王亚婷,周海飞,等. ADC平均值及最小值与食管癌病理特点的相关性分析[J]. 放射学实践,2019,34(9):1002-1006. DOI:10.13609/j.cnki.1000-0313.2019.09.014.

[12] Aslan K, Gunbey HP, Tomak L, et al. The diagnostic value of using combined MR diffusion tensor imaging parameters to differentiate between low- and high-grade meningioma[J].Br J Radiol,2018,91(1088):20180088. DOI:10.1259/bjr.20180088.

[13] Tamada T, Prabhu V, Li J, et al. Assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using apparent diffusion coefficient values: impact of patient race and age[J].Abdom Radiol (NY),2017,42(6):1744-1751. DOI:10.1007/s00261-017-1058-y.

[14] Alessandrino F, Taghipour M, Hassanzadeh E, et al. Predictive role of PI-RADSv2 and ADC parameters in differentiating Gleason pattern 3 + 4 and 4 + 3 prostate cancer[J].Abdom Radiol (NY),2019,44(1):279-285. DOI:10.1007/s00261-018-1718-6.

[15] 赵醒艳. ADC值和标化ADC值对前列腺癌患者盆腔转移性淋巴结的诊断价值[J]. 临床放射学杂志,2019,38(1):122-125. DOI:10.13437/j.cnki.jcr.2019.01.028.

[16] Barrett T, Priest AN, Lawrence EM, et al. Ratio of tumor to normal prostate tissue apparent diffusion coefficient as a method for quantifying DWI of the prostate[J].AJR Am J Roentgenol,2015,205(6):W585-W593. DOI:10.2214/AJR.15.14338.

[17] De Cobelli F, Ravelli S, Esposito A, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient value and ratio as noninvasive potential biomarkers to predict prostate cancer grading: comparison with prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen[J].AJR Am J Roentgenol,2015,204(3):550-557. DOI:10.2214/AJR.14.13146.

[18] Boesen L, Chabanova E, Løgager V, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient ratio correlates significantly with prostate cancer gleason score at final pathology[J].J Magn Reson Imaging,2015,42(2):446-453. DOI:10.1002/jmri.24801.

[19] Lee SY, Jee WH, Yoo IR, et al. Comparison of 3T diffusion-weighted MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT in musculoskeletal tumours: quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficients and standardized uptake values[J].Br J Radiol,2019,92(1102):20181051. DOI:10.1259/bjr.20181051.

[20] Shen Y, Lv F, Xiao Z, et al. Utility of the relative apparent diffusion coefficient for preoperative assessment of low risk endometrial carcinoma[J].Clin Imaging,2019,56:28-32. DOI:10.1016/j.clinimag.2019.03.001.

[21] Jyoti R, Jain TP, Haxhimolla H, et al. Correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient ratio on 3.0 T MRI with prostate cancer Gleason score[J].Eur J Radiol Open,2018,5:58-63. DOI:10.1016/j.ejro.2018.03.002.

Application of apparent diffusion coefficient to identify low- and medium-high-grade prostate cancer

表观扩散系数鉴别低及中高级别前列腺癌的应用价值

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 0

Recommended Articles

Metrics