scholarly journals Changes in prostate apparent diffusion coefficient values during radiotherapy after neoadjuvant hormones

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 359-364
Author(s):  
Andrew McPartlin ◽  
Lucy Kershaw ◽  
Alan McWilliam ◽  
Marcus Ben Taylor ◽  
Clare Hodgson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Prostate Gland ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Predictive Tool ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Background: Changes in prostate cancer apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) derived from diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provide a noninvasive method for assessing radiotherapy response. This may be attenuated by neoadjuvant hormone therapy (NA-HT). We investigate ADC values measured before, during and after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) following NA-HT. Methods: Patients with ⩾T2c biopsy-proven prostate cancer receiving 3 months of NA-HT plus definitive radiotherapy were prospectively identified. All underwent ADC-MRI scans in the week before EBRT, in the third week of EBRT and 8 weeks after its completion. Imaging was performed at 1.5 T. The tumour, peripheral zone (PZ) and central zone (CZ) of the prostate gland were identified and median ADC calculated for each region and time point. Results: Between September and December 2014, 15 patients were enrolled (median age 68.3, range 57–78) with a median Gleason score of 7 (6–9) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at diagnosis 14 (3–197) ng/ml. Median period of NA-HT prior to first imaging was 96 days (69–115). All patients completed treatment. Median follow up was 25 months (7–34), with one patient relapsing in this time. Thirteen patients completed all imaging as intended, one withdrew after one scan and another missed the final imaging. PZ and CZ could not be identified in one patient. Median tumour ADC before, during and post radiotherapy was 1.24 × 10−3 mm2/s (interquartile range 0.16 × 10−3 mm2/s), 1.31 × 10−3 mm2/s (0.22 × 10−3 mm2/s), then 1.32 × 10−3 mm2/s (0.13 × 10−3 mm2/s) respectively ( p > 0.05). There was no significant difference between median tumour and PZ or CZ ADC at any point. Gleason score did not correlate with ADC values. Conclusions: Differences in ADC parameters of normal and malignant tissue during EBRT appear attenuated by prior NA-HT. The use of changes in ADC as a predictive tool in this group may have limited utility.

scholarly journals Assessment of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values as Predictor of Aggressiveness in Peripheral Zone Prostate Cancer: Comparison with Gleason Score

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shayan Sirat Maheen Anwar ◽  
Zahid Anwar Khan ◽  
Rana Shoaib Hamid ◽  
Fahd Haroon ◽  
Raza Sayani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Value ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Purpose. To determine association between apparent diffusion coefficient value on diffusion-weighted imaging and Gleason score in patients with prostate cancer. Methods. This retrospective case series was conducted at Radiology Department of Aga Khan University between June 2009 and June 2011. 28 patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer were included who underwent ultrasound guided sextant prostate biopsy and MRI. MRI images were analyzed on diagnostic console and regions of interest were drawn. Data were entered and analyzed on SPSS 20.0. ADC values were compared with Gleason score using one-way ANOVA test. Results. In 28 patients, 168 quadrants were biopsied and 106 quadrants were positive for malignancy. 89 lesions with proven malignancy showed diffusion restriction. The mean ADC value for disease with a Gleason score of 6 was 935 mm2/s (SD=248.4 mm2/s); Gleason score of 7 was 837 mm2/s (SD=208.5 mm2/s); Gleason score of 8 was 614 mm2/s (SD=108 mm2/s); and Gleason score of 9 was 571 mm2/s (SD=82 mm2/s). Inverse relationship was observed between Gleason score and mean ADC values. Conclusion. DWI and specifically quantitative ADC values may help differentiate between low-risk (Gleason score, 6), intermediate-risk (Gleason score, 7), and high-risk (Gleason score 8 and 9) prostate cancers, indirectly determining the aggressiveness of the disease.

scholarly journals Discrimination between clinical significant and insignificant prostate cancer with Apparent diffusion coefficient – A systematic review and meta analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans-Jonas Meyer ◽  
Andreas Wienke ◽  
Alexey Surov
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Insignificant Prostate Cancer

Abstract Background Multiparametric MRI has become a corner stone in diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC). Diffusion weighted imaging and the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) can be used to reflect tumor microstructure. The present analysis sought to compare ADC values of clinically insignificant with clinical significant PC based upon a large patient sample. Methods MEDLINE library and SCOPUS databases were screened for the associations between ADC and Gleason score in PC up to May 2019. The primary endpoint of the systematic review was the ADC value of PC groups according to Gleason score. In total 27 studies were suitable for the analysis and included into the present study. The included studies comprised a total of 1633 lesions. Results Clinically relevant PCs (Gleason score 7 and higher) were diagnosed in 1078 cases (66.0%) and insignificant PCs (Gleason score 5 and 6) in 555 cases (34.0%). The pooled mean ADC value of the clinically significant PC was 0.86x10-3 mm2/s [95% CI 0.83-0.90] and the pooled mean value of insignificant PC was 1.1 x10-3 mm2/s [95% CI 1.03-1.18]. Clinical significant PC showed lower ADC values compared to non-significant PC. The pooled ADC values of clinically insignificant PCs were no lower than 0.75 ×10-3 mm2/s. This value may be proposed as a threshold for distinguishing clinically significant from insignificant PCs. Conclusions We evaluated the published literature comparing clinical insignificant with clinically prostate cancer in regard of the Apparent diffusion coefficient values derived from magnetic resonance imaging. We identified that the clinically insignificant prostate cancer have lower ADC values than clinically significant, which may aid in tumor noninvasive tumor characterization in clinical routine.

scholarly journals Assessment of the percentage of apparent diffusion coefficient value changes as an early indicator of the response of colorectal hepatic metastases to chemotherapy

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nada Gamal El-Husseiny ◽  
Sayed Mohamed Mehana ◽  
Sherif Farouk El Zawawy
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Hepatic Metastasis ◽  
Percentage Increase ◽  
Early Assessment ◽  
Response To Chemotherapy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Abstract Background Colorectal cancer is considered one of the most common causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. We aim to evaluate the efficacy of DWI-MRI in predicting response to chemotherapy in this cohort. The study included 30 lesions in 20 biopsy proven-colorectal cancer patients with hepatic metastasis larger than 1 cm. All patients underwent both triphasic CT with intravenous contrast, pre-chemotherapy MRI (axial T2 and DW sequences) which was repeated 21 days following chemotherapy. A follow-up CT was done 2 months later. The response of the lesions was evaluated using the RESCIST criteria. On MRI, the lesions corresponding to the ones chosen on CT were identified and the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of pre- and post-chemotherapy images were recorded and correlated with the CT results. Results In the study, 17 (56.7%) of the lesions showed response to chemotherapy while 13 (43.3%) were non-responding. There was no significant difference in pretreatment ADC values between responding and non-responding lesions (p = 0.14). The mean percentage increase in ADC values in responding lesions was 42% compared to 18% in non-responding lesions (p < 0.001). Lesions that showed less than 18% increase were all found to be non-responsive Conclusion DWI-MRI has an emerging role in early assessment of early treatment response that can be detected before morphological response for patients with hepatic metastasis from colorectal cancer. Based on our study, the use of 25 % as the cutoff point of percent difference in ADC for detection of non-responding lesions proved to be successful only 21 days after the 1st chemotherapy cycle.

scholarly journals Evaluation of apparent diffusion coefficient in endometrial carcinoma compared to normal endometrium: a retrospective study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anu Sarah Easo ◽  
Rajeev Anand ◽  
Mini Issac
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Endometrial Cancer ◽  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Normal Endometrium ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values ◽  
Endometrial Cancers

Background: To determine whether diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with measurement of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) will help in differentiating endometrial cancer from normal endometrium and to determine whether the grades of endometrial cancer will show significant difference in ADC values.Methods: This is a retrospective study done in MOSC medical college hospital Kolencherry. on patients on whom preoperative MRI was done before hysterectomy. Cases from July 2017 to March 2021 were included. Study cases included 40 females with pathologically confirmed endometrial cancer and 30 females with pathologically proven normal endometrium in cases of uterine leiomyoma and cervical cancer. The exclusion criteria for the study were patients with endometrial cancer in whom surgery was not done within 2 weeks of MRI, patients who were treated with chemotherapy or radiotherapy before surgery, patients who had hydrometra or pyometra.Results: The mean ADC value (10−3 mm2/second) of endometrial cancer was 0.77±0.04, which was significantly lower (p<0.05) than that of normal endometrium (1.323±0.05). The ADC values of different grades of endometrial cancers did not show any statistically significant difference (p>0.05).Conclusions: Our study showed that ADC measurement can differentiate between normal endometrium and endometrial cancer. The ADC values of different grades of endometrial cancers did not show any statistically significant difference.  

Differentiation of prostate cancer and stromal hyperplasia in the transition zone with histogram analysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient

2017 ◽  
Vol 58 (12) ◽  
pp. 1528-1534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liu Xiaohang ◽  
Zhou Bingni ◽  
Zhou Liangping ◽  
Peng Weijun ◽  
Yang Xiaoqun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Transition Zone ◽  
B Value ◽  
Histogram Analysis ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri

Background Prostate cancer and stromal hyperplasia (SH) in the transition zone (TZ) are difficult to discriminate by conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). Purpose To investigate the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) of prostate cancer and SH in the TZ with histogram analysis and the ability of ADC metrics to differentiate between these two tissues. Material and Methods Thirty-three cancer and 29 SH lesions in the TZ of 54 patients undergoing preoperative DWI (b-value 0, 1000 s/mm2) were analyzed. All the lesions on the MR images were localized based on histopathologic correlations. The 10th, 25th, and 50th percentiles, and the mean ADC values were calculated for the two tissues and compared. The efficiencies of the 10th, 25th, and 50th ADC percentiles in differentiating the two tissues were compared with that of the mean ADC with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results The 10th, 25th, and 50th percentiles and mean ADC values (×10−3 mm2/s) were 0.86 ± 0.15, 0.89 ± 0.16, 0.94 ± 0.16, and 1.03 ± 0.17 in SH and 0.64 ± 0.12, 0.69 ± 0.12, 0.72 ± 0.16, and 0.83 ± 0.15 in TZ cancer, respectively. The parameters were all significantly lower in cancer than SH. The 10th ADC percentile yielded an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.87 for the differentiation of carcinomas from SH, which was higher than the mean ADC (0.80) ( P < 0.05), and the AUCs of the 25th (0.82) and 50th (0.83) percentiles exhibited no differences from those of the mean ADC ( P > 0.05). Conclusion Histogram analysis of ADC values may potentially improve the differentiation of prostate cancer from SH in the TZ.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document