Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29168004›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2018

Diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate: should we use quantitative metrics to better characterize focal lesions originating in the peripheral zone?

Thibaut Pierre, Francois Cornud, Loïc Colléter, Frédéric Beuvon, Frantz Foissac, Nicolas B Delongchamps, Paul Legmann

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Thibaut PierreDepartment of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France.
Francois CornudDepartment of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France. francois.cornud@imagerietourville.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0808-2488
Loïc ColléterDepartment of Radiology, Hôpital St Louis, 1 avenue Claude Vellefaux, 75010, Paris, France.
Frédéric BeuvonDepartment of Pathology, Hôpital Cochin, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France.
Frantz FoissacDepartment of Biostatistics, Hôpital Tarnier, 89 rue d'Assas, 75006, Paris, France.
Nicolas B DelongchampsDepartment of Urology, Hôpital Cochin, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France.
Paul LegmannDepartment of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France.
Hôpital Cochin · FRHôpital Saint-Louis · FRInstitut Alfred Fournier · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare inter-reader concordance and accuracy of qualitative diffusion-weighted (DW) PIRADSv2.0 score with those of quantitative DW-MRI for the diagnosis of peripheral zone prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND

methodsTwo radiologists independently assigned a DW-MRI-PIRADS score to 92 PZ-foci, in 74 patients (64.3±5.6 years old; median PSA level: 8 ng/ml, normal DRE in 70 men). A standardised ADCmean and nine ADC-derived parameters were measured, including ADCratios with the whole-prostate (WP-ADCratio) or the mirror-PZ (mirror-ADCratio) as reference areas. Surgical histology and MRI-TRUS fusion-biopsy were the reference for tumours and benign foci, respectively. Inter-reader agreement was assessed by the Cohen-kappa-coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Univariate-multivariate regressions determined the most predictive factor for cancer.

resultsFifty lesions were malignant. Inter-reader concordance was fair for qualitative assessment, but excellent for quantitative assessment for all quantitative variables. At univariate analysis, ADCmean, WP-ADCratio and WL-ADCmean performed equally, but significantly better than the mirror-ADCratio (p<0.001). At multivariate analysis, the only independent variable significantly associated with malignancy was the whole-prostate-ADCratio. At a cut-off value of 0.68, sensitivity was 94-90 % and specificity was 60-38 % for readers 1 and 2, respectively.

conclusionThe whole-prostate-ADCratio improved the qualitative inter-reader concordance and characterisation of focal PZ-lesions. KEY POINTS: • Inter-reader concordance of DW PI-RADSv2.0 score for PZ lesions was only fair. • Using a standardised ADCmean measurement and derived DW-quantitative parameters, concordance was excellent. • The whole-prostate ADCratio performed significantly better than the mirror-ADCratio for cancer detection. • At a cut-off of 0.68, sensitivity values of WP-ADCratio were 94-90 %. • The whole-prostate ADCratio may circumvent variations of ADC metrics across centres.

Indexed as

Diffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMaleMiddle AgedProstateProstatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesROC CurveAdultDiffusion magnetic resonance imaging/methodsProstatic neoplasms/diagnostic imagingRetrospective studiesSensitivity and specificity

Identifiers

PMID29168004
OpenAlexW2768903341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.