Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 10, 2025
Tracking the Mammary Architectural Features and Detecting Breast Cancer with Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Published on: December 15, 2014
Longitudinal evaluation of apparent diffusion coefficient values as a predictor of Prostate Cancer Research
Eri Ota1, Naoko Mori2, Shinichi Yamashita3
1Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1 Seiryo-machi, Aoba-ku, Sendai, 980-8574, Japan.
Purpose:
This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) parameters in distinguishing between Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) non-reclassification and reclassification groups during active surveillance (AS) of prostate cancer.
Methods:
We included 55 patients who fulfilled the PRIAS criteria and underwent ≥ 2 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) including diffusion-weighted imaging with an interval of ≤ 3 years between baseline and second MRI. A mono-exponential fitting model was used to automatically create ADC maps with minimum b-values of 0 and maximum of 2000 s/mm2. For detectable lesions on ADC maps, the lesions were manually segmented on each slice of the ADC maps. For undetectable lesions, the corresponding normal-appearing zone of the lobe on each slice of ADC maps was segmented. The ADC data for each slice were summed to obtain the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile ADC values of the histogram at baseline and second MRI. These ADC parameters at baseline and second MRI, and the changes of ADC parameters from baseline to second MRI were compared between PRIAS non-reclassification and reclassification groups.
Results:
The PRIAS reclassification group had significantly lower 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile ADC values at second MRI compared to the non-reclassification group. The non-reclassification group had significantly lower changes in ADC values in these percentiles compared to the reclassification group.
Conclusion:
The ADC parameters at second MRI and the changes from baseline to second MRI may be effective distinguishing factors between PRIAS non-reclassification and reclassification groups.
