PURPOSE: To characterize intermediate and high-risk prostate carcinomas with measurements of standardized uptake values (SUVs) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values by means of simultaneous [18F] choline PET/MRI.
FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 35 patients with primary prostate cancer underwent simultaneous [18F] choline PET/MRI. From these, 21 patients with an intermediate and high risk constellation who were not under ongoing hormonal therapy were included. Altogether 32 tumor lesions with a focal uptake of [18F] choline could be identified. Average ADC values (ADCaver) minimum ADC values (ADCmin) as well as maximum and mean SUVs (SUVmax, SUVmean) of tumor lesions were assessed with volume-of-interest (VOI) and Region-of-interest (ROI) measurements. As a reference, also ADCaver, ADCmin and SUVmax and SUVmean of non-tumorous prostate tissue were measured. Statistical analysis comprised calculation of descriptive parameters and calculation of Pearson's product moment correlations between ADC values and SUVs of tumor lesions.
RESULTS: Mean ADCaver and ADCmin of tumor lesions were 0.94±0.22×10-3 mm2/s and 0.65±0.21×10-3 mm2/s, respectively. Mean SUVmax and SUVmean of tumor lesions were 6.3±2.3 and 2.6±0.8, respectively. These values were in each case significantly different from the reference values (p< 0.001). There was no significant correlation between the measured SUVs and ADC values (SUVmax vs. ADCaver: R = -0.24, p = 0.179; SUVmax vs. ADCmin: R = -0.03, p = 0.877; SUVmean vs. ADCaver: R = -0.27, p = 0.136; SUVmean vs. ADCmin: R = -0.08, p = 0.679).
CONCLUSION: Both SUVs and ADC values differ significantly between tumor lesions and healthy tissue. However, there is no significant correlation between these two parameters. This might be explained by the fact that SUVs and ADC values characterize different parts of tumor biology.
Wetter A, Nensa F, Schenck M, Heusch P, Pöppel T, Bockisch A, Forsting M, Schlosser TW, Lauenstein TC, Nagarajah J. Are you the author?
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany; Department of Urology and Paediatric Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany; University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Dusseldorf, Germany; Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Reference: PLoS One. 2014 Jul 17;9(7):e101571.