Cargando…

Do the variations in ROI placement technique have influence for prostate ADC measurements?

BACKGROUND: Prostate apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values calculated from diffusion-weighted imaging have been used for evaluating prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness. However, the way of measuring ADC values has varied depending on the study. PURPOSE: To investigate inter- and intra-reader...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ueno, Yoshiko, Tamada, Tsutomu, Sofue, Keitaro, Urase, Yasuyo, Hinata, Nobuyuki, Fujisawa, Masato, Murakami, Takamichi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8973079/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35368407
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20584601221086500
_version_ 1784679987242074112
author Ueno, Yoshiko
Tamada, Tsutomu
Sofue, Keitaro
Urase, Yasuyo
Hinata, Nobuyuki
Fujisawa, Masato
Murakami, Takamichi
author_facet Ueno, Yoshiko
Tamada, Tsutomu
Sofue, Keitaro
Urase, Yasuyo
Hinata, Nobuyuki
Fujisawa, Masato
Murakami, Takamichi
author_sort Ueno, Yoshiko
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Prostate apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values calculated from diffusion-weighted imaging have been used for evaluating prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness. However, the way of measuring ADC values has varied depending on the study. PURPOSE: To investigate inter- and intra-reader variability and diagnostic performance of three kinds of shaped 2D regions of interests (ROIs) for tumor ADC measurements in PCa. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy-four patients with PCa undergoing 3-T MRI before surgery were included. Histologic findings from radical prostatectomy specimens were reviewed to define each patient’s dominant tumor. Three readers independently measured the tumor ADCs using three different ROI methods: freehand, large-circle, and small-circles ROIs. Readers repeated measurements after 3 weeks. Bland-Altman analysis was performed to evaluate the inter- and intra-reader variability. Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis was used for assessment of tumor aggressiveness for PCa. RESULTS: For intra-reader and inter-reader variability, the mean coefficient of repeatability for freehand ROIs, large-circle ROIs, and small-circles ROIs were as follows: 13.7%, 12.4%, and 11.5%; 9.4%, 9.7%, and 9.5%. For differentiating Gleason score (GS) = 3 + 3 from GS ≥ 3 + 4 tumors, the area under the curves were 0.90 for freehand ROIs, 0.89 for large-circle ROIs, and 0.94 small-circles ROIs (p = 0.31). CONCLUSION: The variations in ROI method did not have a major influence on intra-reader or inter-reader reproducibility or diagnostic performance for prostate ADC measurements.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8973079
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89730792022-04-02 Do the variations in ROI placement technique have influence for prostate ADC measurements? Ueno, Yoshiko Tamada, Tsutomu Sofue, Keitaro Urase, Yasuyo Hinata, Nobuyuki Fujisawa, Masato Murakami, Takamichi Acta Radiol Open Original Article BACKGROUND: Prostate apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values calculated from diffusion-weighted imaging have been used for evaluating prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness. However, the way of measuring ADC values has varied depending on the study. PURPOSE: To investigate inter- and intra-reader variability and diagnostic performance of three kinds of shaped 2D regions of interests (ROIs) for tumor ADC measurements in PCa. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy-four patients with PCa undergoing 3-T MRI before surgery were included. Histologic findings from radical prostatectomy specimens were reviewed to define each patient’s dominant tumor. Three readers independently measured the tumor ADCs using three different ROI methods: freehand, large-circle, and small-circles ROIs. Readers repeated measurements after 3 weeks. Bland-Altman analysis was performed to evaluate the inter- and intra-reader variability. Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis was used for assessment of tumor aggressiveness for PCa. RESULTS: For intra-reader and inter-reader variability, the mean coefficient of repeatability for freehand ROIs, large-circle ROIs, and small-circles ROIs were as follows: 13.7%, 12.4%, and 11.5%; 9.4%, 9.7%, and 9.5%. For differentiating Gleason score (GS) = 3 + 3 from GS ≥ 3 + 4 tumors, the area under the curves were 0.90 for freehand ROIs, 0.89 for large-circle ROIs, and 0.94 small-circles ROIs (p = 0.31). CONCLUSION: The variations in ROI method did not have a major influence on intra-reader or inter-reader reproducibility or diagnostic performance for prostate ADC measurements. SAGE Publications 2022-03-30 /pmc/articles/PMC8973079/ /pubmed/35368407 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20584601221086500 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Article
Ueno, Yoshiko
Tamada, Tsutomu
Sofue, Keitaro
Urase, Yasuyo
Hinata, Nobuyuki
Fujisawa, Masato
Murakami, Takamichi
Do the variations in ROI placement technique have influence for prostate ADC measurements?
title Do the variations in ROI placement technique have influence for prostate ADC measurements?
title_full Do the variations in ROI placement technique have influence for prostate ADC measurements?
title_fullStr Do the variations in ROI placement technique have influence for prostate ADC measurements?
title_full_unstemmed Do the variations in ROI placement technique have influence for prostate ADC measurements?
title_short Do the variations in ROI placement technique have influence for prostate ADC measurements?
title_sort do the variations in roi placement technique have influence for prostate adc measurements?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8973079/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35368407
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20584601221086500
work_keys_str_mv AT uenoyoshiko dothevariationsinroiplacementtechniquehaveinfluenceforprostateadcmeasurements
AT tamadatsutomu dothevariationsinroiplacementtechniquehaveinfluenceforprostateadcmeasurements
AT sofuekeitaro dothevariationsinroiplacementtechniquehaveinfluenceforprostateadcmeasurements
AT uraseyasuyo dothevariationsinroiplacementtechniquehaveinfluenceforprostateadcmeasurements
AT hinatanobuyuki dothevariationsinroiplacementtechniquehaveinfluenceforprostateadcmeasurements
AT fujisawamasato dothevariationsinroiplacementtechniquehaveinfluenceforprostateadcmeasurements
AT murakamitakamichi dothevariationsinroiplacementtechniquehaveinfluenceforprostateadcmeasurements