Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 7, 2026

Safety Precautions and Operating Procedures in an ABSL-4 Laboratory: 3. Aerobiology
Published on: October 3, 2016
Predictive role of PI-RADSv2 and ADC parameters in differentiating Gleason pattern 3 + 4 and 4 + 3 prostate cancer
Francesco Alessandrino1,2, Mehdi Taghipour3, Elmira Hassanzadeh3,4
1Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. falessandrino@bwh.harvard.edu.
Purpose:
To compare the predictive roles of qualitative (PI-RADSv2) and quantitative assessment (ADC metrics), in differentiating Gleason pattern (GP) 3 + 4 from the more aggressive GP 4 + 3 prostate cancer (PCa) using radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen as the reference standard.
Methods:
We retrospectively identified treatment-naïve peripheral (PZ) and transitional zone (TZ) Gleason Score 7 PCa patients who underwent multiparametric 3T prostate MRI (DWI with b value of 0,1400 and where unavailable, 0,500) and subsequent RP from 2011 to 2015. For each lesion identified on MRI, a PI-RADSv2 score was assigned by a radiologist blinded to pathology data. A PI-RADSv2 score ≤ 3 was defined as "low risk," a PI-RADSv2 score ≥ 4 as "high risk" for clinically significant PCa. Mean tumor ADC (ADCT), ADC of adjacent normal tissue (ADCN), and ADCratio (ADCT/ADCN) were calculated. Stepwise regression analysis using tumor location, ADCT and ADCratio, b value, low vs. high PI-RADSv2 score was performed to differentiate GP 3 + 4 from 4 + 3.
Results:
119 out of 645 cases initially identified met eligibility requirements. 76 lesions were GP 3 + 4, 43 were 4 + 3. ADCratio was significantly different between the two GP groups (p = 0.001). PI-RADSv2 score ("low" vs. "high") was not significantly different between the two GP groups (p = 0.17). Regression analysis selected ADCT (p = 0.03) and ADCratio (p = 0.0007) as best predictors to differentiate GP 4 + 3 from 3 + 4. Estimated sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the predictive model in differentiating GP 4 + 3 from 3 + 4 were 37, 82, and 66%, respectively.
Conclusions:
ADC metrics could differentiate GP 3 + 4 from 4 + 3 PCa with high specificity and moderate accuracy while PI-RADSv2, did not differentiate between these patterns.
More Related Videos
12:43The Synthesis of [Sn10SiSiMe334]2- Using a Metastable SnI Halide Solution Synthesized via a Co-condensation Technique
Published on: November 28, 2016
06:04Author Spotlight: Innovative Approaches to Understanding Plant Structure-Function Relationships for Climate-Resilient Crops
Published on: July 12, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 Inhibitors
ortho–para-Directing Activators: –CH3, –OH, –⁠NH2, –OCH3
Amides to Amines: LiAlH4 Reduction
Amide reduction requires two equivalents of the reducing agent, acting as a source of hydride ions. As shown in the figure, the reaction is initiated with a nucleophilic attack by the hydride ion at the carbonyl carbon to form a tetrahedral intermediate.
Piaget's Stage 4 of Cognitive Development
Abstract Reasoning and Hypothetical-Deductive Thinking
Unlike the concrete operational...
Nitriles to Amines: LiAlH4 Reduction
As shown below, the mechanism involves three steps. Firstly, the hydride ion acting as a nucleophile attacks the nitrile carbon to form an anion. In the second step, a second equivalent of the hydride ion attacks the anion to...
Acid Halides to Alcohols: LiAlH4 Reduction
The mechanism proceeds in three steps. First, the nucleophilic hydride ion attacks the carbonyl carbon of the acid halide to form a tetrahedral intermediate. Next, the carbonyl group is re-formed, and the halide ion departs as a leaving group, generating an aldehyde. A second nucleophilic attack by the hydride yields an alkoxide ion, which, upon protonation, gives a primary alcohol as...