ArticleAJR. American journal of roentgenology2018
Can Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values Assist PI-RADS Version 2 DWI Scoring? A Correlation Study Using the PI-RADSv2 and International Society of Urological Pathology Systems.
Article in AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Comparison of image quality between simultaneous multi-slice single-shot EPI and readout-segmented EPI in diffusion-weighted imaging of prostate cancer: a retrospective study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Predictive Value of Quantitative ADC, SUVmax, and the SUVmax/ADC Ratio for Biological Behavior and Prognosis in High-Risk Prostate Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Diffusion levels for quantitative assessment of the apparent diffusion coefficient value in prostate MRI: a proof-of-concept bicentric study.European radiology · 2025Article
- The QIBA Profile for Diffusion-Weighted MRI: Apparent Diffusion Coefficient as a Quantitative Imaging Biomarker.Radiology · 2024Review
- Optimizing prostate cancer detection in transition zone: an analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient values in prostate magnetic resonance imaging evaluation with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) assessment.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Article
- Article
- PI-RADS: Where Next?Radiology · 2023Review
- Clinical value of minimum apparent diffusion coefficient for prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer in the transition zone.International journal of clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Variability in contrast and apparent diffusion coefficient of kiwifruit used as prostate MRI phantom: 1-week validation.Radiological physics and technology · 2022Article
- Biparametric prostate MRI: impact of a deep learning-based software and of quantitative ADC values on the inter-reader agreement of experienced and inexperienced readers.La Radiologia medica · 2022Article
- Infiltrative growth pattern of prostate cancer is associated with lower uptake on PSMA PET and reduced diffusion restriction on mpMRI.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
- The value of the apparent diffusion coefficient value in the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018.Polish journal of radiology · 2022Article
- PI-RADSv2.1: Current status.Turkish journal of urology · 2021Review
- Evaluation of relationships between the final Gleason score, PI-RADS v2 score, ADC value, PSA level, and tumor diameter in patients that underwent radical prostatectomy due to prostate cancer.La Radiologia medica · 2020Article
- Effect of observation size and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in PI-RADS v2.1 assessment category 4 and 5 observations compared to adverse pathological outcomes.European radiology · 2020Article
- Effects of the addition of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient data on the diagnostic performance of the PI-RADS v2 scoring system to detect clinically significant prostate cancer.World journal of urology · 2020Article
- Detection of clinically signifi cant prostate cancer with PIRADS v2 scores, PSA density, and ADC values in regions with and without mpMRI visible lesions.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe purposes of this study were to assess correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and normalized ADC (ratio of tumor to nontumor tissue) with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) and updated International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) categories and to determine how to optimally use ADC metrics for objective assistance in categorizing lesions within PI-RADSv2 guidelines. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this retrospective study, 100 patients (median age, 62 years; range, 44-75 years; prostate-specific antigen level, 7.18 ng/mL; range, 1.70-84.56 ng/mL) underwent 3-T multiparametric MRI of the prostate with an endorectal coil. Mean ADC was extracted from ROIs based on subsequent prostatectomy specimens. Histopathologic analysis revealed 172 lesions (113 peripheral, 59 transition zone). Two radiologists blinded to histopathologic outcome assigned PI-RADSv2 categories. Kendall tau was used to correlate ADC metrics with PI-RADSv2 and ISUP categories. ROC curves were used to assess the utility of ADC metrics in differentiating each reader's PI-RADSv2 DWI category 4 or 5 assessment in the whole prostate and by zone.
resultsADC metrics negatively correlated with ISUP category in the whole prostate (ADC, τ = -0.21, p = 0.0002; normalized ADC, τ = -0.21, p = 0.0001). Moderate negative correlation was found in expert PI-RADSv2 DWI categories (ADC, τ = -0.34; normalized ADC, τ = -0.31; each p < 0.0001) maintained across zones. In the whole prostate, AUCs of ADC and normalized ADC were 87% and 82% for predicting expert PI-RADSv2 DWI category 4 or 5. A derived optimal cutoff ADC less than 1061 and normalized ADC less than 0.65 achieved positive predictive values of 83% and 84% for correct classification of PI-RADSv2 DWI category 4 or 5 by an expert reader. Consistent relations and predictive values were found by an independent novice reader.
conclusionADC and normalized ADC inversely correlate with PI-RADSv2 and ISUP categories and can serve as quantitative metrics to assist with assigning PI-RADSv2 DWI category 4 or 5.
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.