• J Magn Reson Imaging · Mar 2019

    Prostate Cancer Differentiation and Aggressiveness: Assessment With a Radiomic-Based Model vs. PI-RADS v2.

    • Tong Chen, Mengjuan Li, Yuefan Gu, Yueyue Zhang, Shuo Yang, Chaogang Wei, Jiangfen Wu, Xin Li, Wenlu Zhao, and Junkang Shen.
    • Department of Radiology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
    • J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019 Mar 1; 49 (3): 875-884.

    BackgroundMultiparametric MRI (mp-MRI) combined with machine-aided approaches have shown high accuracy and sensitivity in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis. However, radiomics-based analysis has not been thoroughly compared with Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) scores.PurposeTo develop and validate a radiomics-based model for differentiating PCa and assessing its aggressiveness compared with PI-RADS v2 scores.Study TypeRetrospective.PopulationIn all, 182 patients with biopsy-proven PCa and 199 patients with a biopsy-proven absence of cancer were enrolled in our study.Field Strength/SequenceConventional and diffusion-weighted MR images (b values = 0, 1000 sec/mm2 ) were acquired on a 3.0T MR scanner.AssessmentA total of 396 features and 385 features were extracted from apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) images and T2 WI, respectively. A predictive model was constructed for differentiating PCa from non-PCa and high-grade from low-grade PCa. The diagnostic performance of each radiomics-based model was compared with that of the PI-RADS v2 scores.Statistical TestsA radiomics-based predictive model was constructed by logistic regression analysis. 70% of the patients were assigned to the training group, and the remaining were assigned to the validation group. The diagnostic efficacy was analyzed with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) in both the training and validation groups.ResultsFor PCa versus non-PCa, the validation model had an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.985, 0.982, and 0.999 with T2 WI, ADC, and T2 WI&ADC features, respectively. For low-grade versus high-grade PCa, the validation model had an AUC of 0.865, 0.888, and 0.93 with T2 WI, ADC, and T2 WI&ADC features, respectively. PI-RADS v2 had an AUC of 0.867 in differentiating PCa from non-PCa and an AUC of 0.763 in differentiating high-grade from low-grade PCa.Data ConclusionBoth the T2 WI- and ADC-based radiomics models showed high diagnostic efficacy and outperformed the PI-RADS v2 scores in distinguishing cancerous vs. noncancerous prostate tissue and high-grade vs. low-grade PCa.Level Of Evidence3 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:875-884.© 2018 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.