ArticleAJR. American journal of roentgenology2016
Assessment of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness by Use of the Combination of Quantitative DWI and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI.
Article in AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed, 76 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rare prostate cancer histologies: detection, characteristics and treatment.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026Review
- Comparative evaluation of ADC and ADC ratio in differentiating Gleason Score 7 in prostate cancer imaging.European journal of radiology open · 2025Article
- Normalization of temperature effects for quality assurance of quantitative prostate apparent diffusion coefficient imaging across multiple sites.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Quantitative evaluation of apparent diffusion coefficient in a large multi-unit institution.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Quantitative Prostate MRI, From theAJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2025Review
- The Role of Radiomic Analysis and Different Machine Learning Models in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Improved prostate cancer diagnosis: upgraded prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) scores by zoomed diffusion-weighted imaging enhance deep-learning-based computer-aided diagnosis accuracy.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Investigating MRI-Associated Biological Aspects of Racial Disparities in Prostate Cancer for African American and White Men.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2025Article
- Optimizing Multiparametric MRI Protocols for Prostate Cancer Detection: A Comprehensive Assessment Aligned with PI-RADS Guidelines.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Role of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Value and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Ratio as Prognostic Factors for Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: A review of current technology.World journal of radiology · 2024Review
- Comparison of Early Contrast Enhancement Models in Ultrafast Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Prostate Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Repeatability and reproducibility of prostate apparent diffusion coefficient values on a 1.5 T magnetic resonance linear accelerator.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Neon ion (Cancer science · 2024Article
- Prostate Cancers Invisible on Multiparametric MRI: Pathologic Features in Correlation with Whole-Mount Prostatectomy.Cancers · 2023Article
- Automated prostate multi-regional segmentation in magnetic resonance using fully convolutional neural networks.European radiology · 2023Article
- Prediction of pelvic lymph node metastases and PSMA PET positive pelvic lymph nodes with multiparametric MRI and clinical information in primary staging of prostate cancer.European journal of radiology open · 2023Article
- Correlation between ADC, ADC ratio, and Gleason Grade group in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: Retrospective multicenter study with different MRI scanners.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Prospective evaluation of PI-RADS v2 and quantitative MRI for clinically significant prostate cancer detection in Indian men - East meets West.Arab journal of urology · 2022Article
- Network Analysis Integrating microRNA Expression Profiling with MRI Biomarkers and Clinical Data for Prostate Cancer Early Detection: A Proof of Concept Study.Biomedicines · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to investigate whether the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value from DWI and the forward volume transfer constant (K(trans)) value from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI independently predict prostate cancer aggressiveness, and to determine whether the combination of both parameters performs better than either parameter alone in assessing tumor aggressiveness before treatment. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included 158 men with histopathologically confirmed prostate cancer who underwent 3-T MRI before undergoing prostatectomy in 2011. Whole-mount step-section pathologic maps identified 195 prostate cancer foci that were 0.5 mL or larger; these foci were then volumetrically assessed to calculate the per-tumor ADC and K(trans) values. Associations between MRI and histopathologic parameters were assessed using Spearman correlation coefficients, univariate and multivariable logistic regression, and AUCs.
resultsThe median ADC and K(trans) values showed moderate correlation only for tumors for which the Gleason score (GS) was 4 + 4 or higher (ρ = 0.547; p = 0.042). The tumor ADC value was statistically significantly associated with all dichotomized GSs (p < 0.005), including a GS of 3 + 3 versus a GS of 3 + 4 or higher (AUC, 0.693; p = 0.001). The tumor K(trans) value differed statistically significantly only between tumors with a GS of 3 + 3 and those with a primary Gleason grade of 4 (p ≤ 0.015), and it made a statistically significant contribution only in differentiating tumors with a GS of 4 + 3 or higher (AUC, 0.711; p < 0.001) and those with a GS of 4 + 4 or higher (AUC, 0.788; p < 0.001) from lower-grade tumors. Combining ADC and K(trans) values improved diagnostic performance in characterizing tumors with a GS of 4 + 3 or higher and those with a GS of 4 + 4 or higher (AUC, 0.739 and 0.856, respectively; p < 0.01).
conclusionAlthough the ADC value helped to differentiate between all GSs, the K(trans) value was only a benefit in characterizing more aggressive tumors. Combining these parameters improves their performance in identifying patients with aggressive tumors who may require radical treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.