Comparison of T2* Mapping with Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in the Characterization of Low- vs Intermediate- and High-Grade Prostate Cancer.

To evaluate the diagnostic value of T2* mapping compared with ADC mapping in the characterization of low- (Gleason score, ≤ 6) vs intermediate- and high-grade (Gleason score ≥ 7) prostate cancer.

Sixty-two patients who underwent MRI before prostatectomy were evaluated. Two readers independently scored the probabilities of tumours in twelve regions of the prostate on T2* and ADC images. The data were divided into two groups, i.e., low- vs intermediate- and high-grade prostate cancer, and correlated with the histopathological results. The diagnostic performance parameters, areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUCs) and inter-reader agreements were calculated.

For reader 2, the ADC mapping exhibited greater accuracy for the intermediate-grade prostate cancers than the high-grade prostate cancers (0.77 vs 0.83, P<0.05). For both readers, the T2 * mapping exhibited a greater accuracy for the intermediate-grade prostate cancers than the high-grade prostate cancers (reader 1, 0.86 vs. 0.81; reader 2, 0.83 vs 0.78, P<0.05). The AUCs of the T2 * mappings were greater than those of the ADC mappings for the intermediate- and high-grade (reader 1, 0.83 vs. 0.78; reader 2, 0.80 vs 0.75, P<0.05) prostate cancers but not for the low-grade (reader 1, 0.86 vs 0.84; reader 2, 0.83 vs. 0.82, P>0.05) prostate cancers. The weighted κ value of the T2 * mapping was 0.59.

T2 * mapping improves the accuracy of the characterization of intermediate- and high-grade but not low-grade prostate cancers compared with ADC mapping. Advances in knowledge: T2 * mapping exhibited greater diagnostic accuracy than ADC mapping in the characterization of intermediate- and high-grade prostate cancers. T2 * mapping exhibited limited value in the characterization of low-grade prostate cancer.

The British journal of radiology. 2016 Apr 19 [Epub ahead of print]

Lian-Ming Wu, Zi-Zhou Zhao, Xiao-Xi Chen, Qing Lu, Si-Teng Suo, Qiang Liu, Jiani Hu, E M Haccke, Jian-Rong Xu

1 Department of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200127, China., 1 Department of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200127, China., 1 Department of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200127, China., 1 Department of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200127, China., 1 Department of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200127, China., 2 Department of Pathology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200127, China., 3 Department of Radiology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, 48201,United States., 3 Department of Radiology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, 48201,United States., 1 Department of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200127, China.

E-Newsletters

Newsletter subscription

Free Daily and Weekly newsletters offered by content of interest

The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are rapidly advancing. Sign up today for articles, videos, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.

Subscribe