Prostate MRI: Evaluating Tumor Volume and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient as Surrogate Biomarkers for Predicting Tumor Gleason Score

Purpose: To investigate whether tumor volume derived from apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps (VolumeADC) and tumor mean ADC value (ADCmean) are independent predictors of prostate tumor Gleason score (GS). Experimental Design: Tumor volume and GS were recorded from whole-mount histopathology for 131 men (median age, 60 years) who underwent endorectal diffusion-weighted MRI for local staging of prostate cancer before prostatectomy. VolumeADC and ADCmean were derived from ADC maps and correlated with histopathologic tumor volume and GS. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate prediction of tumor aggressiveness. Areas under receiver-operating characteristics curves (AUC) were calculated to evaluate the performance of VolumeADC and ADCmean in discriminating tumors of GS 6 and GS ≥7. Results: Histopathology identified 116 tumor foci >0.5 mL. VolumeADC correlated significantly with histopathologic tumor volume (ρ = 0.683). The correlation increased with increasing GS (ρ = 0.453 for GS 6 tumors; ρ = 0.643 for GS 7 tumors; ρ = 0.980 for GS ≥8 tumors). Both VolumeADC (ρ = 0.286) and ADCmean (ρ = −0.309) correlated with GS. At univariate analysis, both VolumeADC (P = 0.0325) and ADCmean (P = 0.0033) could differentiate GS = 6 from GS ≥7 tumor foci. However, at multivariate analysis, only ADCmean (P = 0.0156) was a significant predictor of tumor aggressiveness (i.e., GS 6 vs. GS ≥7). For differentiating GS 6 from GS ≥7 tumors, AUCs were 0.644 and 0.704 for VolumeADC and ADCmean, respectively, and 0.749 for both parameters combined. Conclusion: In patients with prostate cancer, ADCmean is an independent predictor of tumor aggressiveness, but VolumeADC is not. The latter parameter adds little to the ADCmean in predicting tumor GS. Clin Cancer Res; 20(14); 3705–11. ©2014 AACR.

[1]  Yousef Mazaheri,et al.  Prostate cancer aggressiveness: assessment with whole-lesion histogram analysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient. , 2014, Radiology.

[2]  B. Seifert,et al.  Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of upper abdominal organs: field strength and intervendor variability of apparent diffusion coefficients. , 2014, Radiology.

[3]  Karin Haustermans,et al.  Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer localization in correlation to whole‐mount histopathology , 2013, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[4]  M. Giger,et al.  Quantitative analysis of multiparametric prostate MR images: differentiation between prostate cancer and normal tissue and correlation with Gleason score--a computer-aided diagnosis development study. , 2013, Radiology.

[5]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2013 , 2013, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[6]  T. Scheenen,et al.  Prostate cancer aggressiveness: in vivo assessment of MR spectroscopy and diffusion-weighted imaging at 3 T. , 2012, Radiology.

[7]  H. Ahmed,et al.  Do low-grade and low-volume prostate cancers bear the hallmarks of malignancy? , 2012, The Lancet. Oncology.

[8]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Correlation of magnetic resonance imaging tumor volume with histopathology. , 2012, The Journal of urology.

[9]  John Kurhanewicz,et al.  Transatlantic Consensus Group on active surveillance and focal therapy for prostate cancer , 2012, BJU international.

[10]  H. Ahmed,et al.  Focal therapy for localised unifocal and multifocal prostate cancer: a prospective development study , 2012, The Lancet. Oncology.

[11]  A. Oto,et al.  Diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation of quantitative MR parameters with Gleason score and tumor angiogenesis. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[12]  Yousef Mazaheri,et al.  Diffusion-weighted endorectal MR imaging at 3 T for prostate cancer: tumor detection and assessment of aggressiveness. , 2011, Radiology.

[13]  Dan Stoianovici,et al.  Advancements in MR imaging of the prostate: from diagnosis to interventions. , 2011, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[14]  H. Huisman,et al.  Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. , 2011, Radiology.

[15]  N. Lawrentschuk,et al.  Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: an update , 2011, Nature Reviews Urology.

[16]  S. Verma,et al.  Assessment of aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient with histologic grade after radical prostatectomy. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[17]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images? , 2011, Radiology.

[18]  E. Merkle,et al.  Field Strength and Diffusion Encoding Technique Affect the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Measurements in Diffusion-Weighted Imaging of the Abdomen , 2010, Investigative radiology.

[19]  A. Prando Prostate tumor volume measurement with combined T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted MR: correlation with pathologic tumor volume , 2009 .

[20]  Jason A Koutcher,et al.  Prostate tumor volume measurement with combined T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted MR: correlation with pathologic tumor volume. , 2009, Radiology.

[21]  Matthew R Cooperberg,et al.  Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment. , 2007, The Journal of urology.

[22]  P. Scardino,et al.  Localized prostate cancer , 2003 .

[23]  D. Altman,et al.  Calculating correlation coefficients with repeated observations: Part 2—correlation between subjects , 1995, BMJ.

[24]  D. Altman,et al.  Statistics notes: Calculating correlation coefficients with repeated observations: Part 1—correlation within subjects , 1995 .

[25]  A S Whittemore,et al.  Localized prostate cancer. Relationship of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer , 1993, Cancer.

[26]  J. McNeal Cancer volume and site of origin of adenocarcinoma in the prostate: relationship to local and distant spread. , 1992, Human pathology.

[27]  T. Stamey,et al.  Zonal Distribution of Prostatic Adenocarcinoma: Correlation with Histologic Pattern and Direction of Spread , 1988, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[28]  T. Stamey,et al.  Morphometric and clinical studies on 68 consecutive radical prostatectomies. , 1988, The Journal of urology.

[29]  T. H. van der Kwast,et al.  A critical analysis of the tumor volume threshold for clinically insignificant prostate cancer using a data set of a randomized screening trial. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[30]  Liying Zhang,et al.  Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[31]  Theodore L DeWeese,et al.  Clinical practice. Localized prostate cancer. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  C. Compton,et al.  AJCC Cancer Staging Manual , 2002, Springer New York.

[33]  N. Dubrawsky Cancer statistics , 1989, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.