Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values of Prostate Cancer: Comparison of 2D and 3D ROIs
- 1 January 2018
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Roentgen Ray Society in American Journal of Roentgenology
- Vol. 210 (1), 113-117
- https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.17.18495
Abstract
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare the reproducibility and diagnostic performance of 2D and 3D ROIs for prostate apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The study included 56 patients with prostate cancer undergoing 3-T MRI including DWI (b = 50 and 1000 s/mm2) before radical prostatectomy. Histologic findings from prostatectomy specimens were reviewed to denote each patient's dominant tumor and a benign region with visually decreased ADC. Three readers independently measured the ADCs of both areas using an ROI placed on a single slice through the lesion (2D) and an ROI encompassing all slices through the lesion (3D). Readers repeated measurements after 3 weeks. Assessment included Bland-Altman analysis (coefficient of repeatability [CR] in which lower values indicated higher reliability) and ROC analysis. RESULTS. For intrareader variability, the CRs across readers for all ROIs were 9.9% for 2D and 9.3% for 3D. For tumor ROIs the CRs were 10.6% for 2D and 9.6% for 3D. For interreader variability, the CRs across readers for all ROIs were 17.1% for 2D and 20.5% for 3D and for tumor ROIs were 17.9% for 2D and 22.2% for 3D. For combined reader data, the AUCs for benign and malignant findings were 0.77 for 2D and 0.78 for 3D (p = 0.146). For differentiating Gleason score (GS) 3 + 3 from GS > 3 + 3 tumors, the AUCs were 0.92 for 2D and 0.92 for 3D ROIs (p = 0.649). For differentiating GS ≤ 3 + 4 from GS ≥ 4 + 3 tumors, the AUCs were 0.70 for 2D and 0.67 for 3D ROIs (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION. Use of a 3D ROI did not improve intrareader or interreader reproducibility or diagnostic performance compared with use of a 2D ROI for prostate ADC measurements. Interreader reproducibility of 2D ROIs was suboptimal nonetheless.Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Utility of Diffusional Kurtosis Imaging as a Marker of Adverse Pathologic Outcomes Among Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Candidates Undergoing Radical ProstatectomyAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2013
- Quantitative Analysis of Multiparametric Prostate MR Images: Differentiation between Prostate Cancer and Normal Tissue and Correlation with Gleason Score—A Computer-aided Diagnosis Development StudyRadiology, 2013
- Diffusion‐weighted MRI and its role in prostate cancerNMR in Biomedicine, 2013
- Prostate Cancer: Feasibility and Preliminary Experience of a Diffusional Kurtosis Model for Detection and Assessment of Aggressiveness of Peripheral Zone CancerRadiology, 2012
- Tumour ADC measurements in rectal cancer: effect of ROI methods on ADC values and interobserver variabilityEuropean Radiology, 2011
- Apparent Diffusion Coefficient as a Predictive Biomarker of Prostate Cancer Progression: Value of Fast and Slow Diffusion ComponentsAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2011
- The index lesion and focal therapy: an analysis of the pathological characteristics of prostate cancerBJU International, 2010
- A Study of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Men with Untreated Localised Prostate Cancer on Active SurveillanceEuropean Urology, 2009
- The Index Lesion and the Origin of Prostate CancerThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Intermixed Normal Tissue within Prostate Cancer: Effect on MR Imaging Measurements of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient and T2—Sparse versus Dense CancersRadiology, 2008