Purpose: Normalization of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) may overcome ADC variability attributable to different patient and/or technical factors. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of ADC and the normalized ADC (nADC) for differentiating between prostate cancer with a Gleason score (GS) = 6 and GS > 6 and to identify an optimum reference for nADC calculations.

Materials And Methods: Our study population comprised 58 patients who underwent diffusion-weighted MRI followed by radical prostatectomy. The nADC of the prostate cancer was calculated as ADC (cancer)/ADC (reference) by using the obturator internus muscle, urine in the bladder, and a 20-ml saline bottle placed on the groin as references. We performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to identify the optimum reference for nADC calculations.

Results: To differentiate between GS = 6 and GS > 6 prostate cancer, the area under the ROC curve of the nADC obtained with a saline bottle as reference was best (0.85) and significantly better than the area under the ADC ROC curve (0.71).

Conclusions: nADC is superior to ADC for estimating the aggressiveness of prostate cancer. It is a noninvasive technique that aids in the selection of appropriate treatments.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11604-014-0367-0DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

prostate cancer
20
apparent diffusion
8
diffusion coefficient
8
aggressiveness prostate
8
gs = 6 gs > 6
8
identify optimum
8
optimum reference
8
reference nadc
8
saline bottle
8
roc curve
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!