Usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient map in diagnosing prostate carcinoma: Correlation with stepwise histopathology

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 132-139

  Yoshimitsu, Kengo ^a,b   Kiyoshima, Keijiro ^a   Irie, Hiroyuki ^a   Tajima, Tsuyoshi ^a   Asayama, Yoshiki ^a   Hirakawa, Masakazu ^a   Ishigami, Kousei ^a   Naito, Seiji ^a   Honda, Hiroshi ^a  

^a KYUSHU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b KYUSHU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

ADC map; Diffusion weighted image; Localization; MR; Prostate carcinoma

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; GLEASON SCORE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CARCINOMA; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR VOLUME;

AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 37849007907     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21181     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures 2004. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2004. 60 p. Available at: http://www.cancer.org/ downloads/STT/CAFF_finalPWSecured.pdf. Last accessed: September 20, 2007.
2. Carroll PR, Presti JC Jr, Small E, Roach M III. Focal therapy for prostate cancer 1996: maximizing outcome. Urology 1997; 49(Suppl 3A):84-94.
3. Meerleer GD, Villeirs G, Bral S, et al. The magnetic resonance detected intraprostatic lesions in prostate cancer: planning and delivery of intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2005;75:325-333.
4. Blana A, Walter B, Rogenhoer S, Wieland W. High-intensity focused ultrasound for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: 5-year experience. Urology 2004;63:297-300.
5. Rajesh A, Coakley FV. MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging of prostate cancer. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2004;12:557-579.
6. Engelbrecht MR, Huisman HJ, Laheij RJ, et al. Discrimination of prostate cancer from normal peripheral zone and central gland tissue by using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 2003;229:248-254.
7. Hasumi M, Suzuki K, Taketomi A, et al. The combination of multivoxel MR spectroscopy with MR imaging improve the diagnostic accuracy for localization of prostate cancer. Anticancer Res 2003; 23:4223-4227.
8. Ikonen S, Kivisaari L, Tervahartiala P, Vehmas T, Taari K, Rannikko S. Prostatic MR imaging. Accuracy in differentiating cancer from other prostatic disorders. Acta Radiol 2001;42:348-354.
9. Dhingsa R, Qayyum A, Coakley FV, et al. Prostate cancer localization with endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging: effect of clinical data on reader accuracy. Radiology 2004;230:215-220.
10. Kurhanewicz J, Swanson MG, Nelson SJ, Vigneron DB. Combined magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopic imaging approach to molecular imaging of prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;16:451-463.
11. Kumar R, Kumar M, Jagannathan NR, Gupta NP, Hemal AK. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy with a body coil in the diagnosis of carcinoma prostate. Urol Res 2004;32:36-40.
12. Kiessling F, Huber PE, Grobholz R, et al. Dynamic magnetic resonance tomography and proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy of prostate cancers in rats treated by radiotherapy. Invest Radiol 2004;39:34-44.
13. Kaji Y, Wada A, Imaoka I, et al. Proton two-dimensional chemical shift imaging for evaluation of prostate cancer: external surface coil vs. endorectal surface coil. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;16:697-706.
14. Coakley FV, Kurhanewicz J, Lu Y, et al. Prostate cancer tumor volume: measurement with endorectal MR and MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 2002;223:91-97.
15. Purohit RS, Shinohara K, Meng MV, Carroll PR. Imaging clinically localized prostate cancer. Urol Clin North Am 2003;30:279-293.
16. Hom JF, Coakley FV, Simko JP, et al. Prostate cancer: endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging - distinction of true-positive from chance-detected lesions. Radiology 2006;238:192-199.
17. Ichikawa T, Haradome H, Hachiya J, Nitatori T, Araki T. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging with a single-shot echoplanar sequence: detection and characterization of focal hepatic lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;170:397-402.
18. Castillo M, Smith JK, Kwock L, Wilber K. Apparent diffusion coefficients in the evaluation of high-grade cerebral gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2001;22:60-64.
19. Nakayama T, Yoshimitsu K, Irie H, et al. Usefulness of the calculated apparent diffusion coefficient value in the differential diagnosis of retroperitoneal masses. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004;20:735-742.
20. Nakayama T, Yoshimitsu K, Irie H, et al. Diffusion-weighted echoplanar MR imaging and ADC mapping in the differential diagnosis of ovarian cystic masses: usefulness of detecting keratinoid substances in mature cystic teratomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 22:271-278.
21. Gibbs P, Tozer DJ, Liney GP, Turnbull LW. Comparison of quantitative T2 mapping and diffusion-weighted imaging in the normal and pathologic prostate. Magn Reson Med 2001;46:1054-1058.
22. Issa B. In vivo measurement of the apparent diffusion coefficient in normal and malignant prostatic tissues using echo-planar imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;16:196-200.
23. Hosseinzadeh K, Schwarz SD. Endorectal diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate cancer to differentiate malignant and benign peripheral zone tissue. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004;20:654-661.
24. Sato C, Naganawa S, Nakamura T, et al. Differentiation of noncancerous tissue and cancer lesions by apparent diffusion coefficient values in transition and peripheral zones of the prostate. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;21:258-262.
25. Shimousa R, Fujimoto H, Akamata H, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005;29:149-153.
26. World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Ferney-Voltaire. France: World Medical Association; 2004. 5p. Available at: http://www.wma.net/e/policy/b3.htm. Last accessed: September 20, 2007.
27. Li H, Sugimura K, Kaji Y, et al. Conventional MR capabilities in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in the transition zone. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:729-742.
28. Sodickson DK, McKenzie CA. A generalized approach to parallel magnetic resonance imaging. Med Phys 2001;28:1629-1643.
29. Jaermann T, Crelier G, Pruessmann KP, et al. SENSE-DTI at 3 T. Magn Reson Med 2004;51:230-236.
30. Gleason DF, Vacu RG. Histologic grading and clinical staging of prostatic carcinoma. In: Tannenbaum M. editor. Urologic pathology: the prostate. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger; 1997. p 171-197.
31. Epstein JI. Urinary tract and male genital system. The prostate and seminal vesicle. In: Sternberg SS, editor. Diagnostic surgical pathology. New York: Raven Press; 1989. p 1393-1432.
32. Chen M, Hricak H, Kalbhen CL, et al. Hormonal ablation of prostatic cancer: effects on prostate morphology, tumor detection, and staging by endorectal coil MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 166:1157-1163.
33. Padhani AR, MacVicar AD, Gapinsli CJ, et al. Effects of androgen deprivation on prostatic morphology and vascular permeability evaluated with MR imaging. Radiology 2001;218:365-374.
34. White S, Hricak H, Forstner R, et al. Prostate cancer: effect of post-biopsy hemorrhage on interpretation of MR images. Radiology 1995;195:385-390.
35. Ikonen S, Kivisaari L, Vehmas T, et al. Optimal timing of post-biopsy MR imaging of the prostate. Acta Radiol 2001;42:70-73.