The value of synthetic magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness.

Background: Synthetic magnetic resonance imaging (SyMRI) is a fast, standardized, and robust novel quantitative technique that has the potential to circumvent the subjectivity of interpretation in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and the limitations of existing MRI quantification techniques. Our study aimed to evaluate the potential utility of SyMRI in the diagnosis and aggressiveness assessment of prostate cancer (PCA). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 309 patients with suspected PCA who had undergone mpMRI and SyMRI, and pathologic results were obtained by biopsy or PCA radical prostatectomy (RP). Pathological types were classified as PCA, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), or peripheral zone (PZ) inflammation. According to the Gleason Score (GS), PCA was divided into groups of intermediate-to-high risk (GS ≥4+3) and low-risk (GS ≤3+4). Patients with biopsy-confirmed low-risk PCA were further divided into upgraded and nonupgraded groups based on the GS changes of the RP results. The values of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), T1, T2 and proton density (PD) of these lesions were measured on ADC and SyMRI parameter maps by two physicians; these values were compared between PCA and BPH or inflammation, between the intermediate-to-high-risk and low-risk PCA groups, and between the upgraded and nonupgraded PCA groups. The risk factors affecting GS grades were identified via univariate analysis. The effects of confounding factors were excluded through multivariate logistic regression analysis, and independent predictive factors were calculated. Subsequently, the ADC+Sy(T2+PD) combined models for predicting PCA risk grade or GS upgrade were constructed through data processing analysis. The diagnostic performance of each parameter and the ADC+Sy(T2+PD) model was analyzed. The calibration curve was calculated by the bootstrapping internal validation method (200 bootstrap resamples). Results: The T1, T2, and PD values of PCA were significantly lower than those of BPH or inflammation (P≤0.001) in both the PZ or transitional zone. Among the 178 patients with PCA, intermediate-to-high-risk PCA group had significantly higher T1, T2, and PD values but lower ADC values compared with the low-risk group (P<0.05), and the diagnostic efficacy of each single parameter was similar (P>0.05). The ADC+Sy(T2+PD) model showed the best performance, with an area under the curve (AUC) 0.110 [AUC =0.818; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.754-0.872] higher than that of ADC alone (AUC =0.708; 95% CI: 0.635-0.774) (P=0.003). Among the 68 patients initially classified as PCA in the low-risk group by biopsy, PCA in the postoperative upgraded GS group had significantly higher T1, T2, and PD values but lower ADC values than did those in the nonupgraded group (P<0.01). In addition, the ADC+Sy(T2+PD) model better predicted the upgrade of GS, with a significant increase in AUC of 0.204 (AUC =0.947; 95% CI: 0.864-0.987) compared with ADC alone (AUC =0.743; 95% CI: 0.622-0.841) (P<0.001). Conclusions: Quantitative parameters (T1, T2, and PD) derived from SyMRI can help differentiate PCA from non-PCA. Combining SyMRI parameters with ADC significantly improved the ability to differentiate between intermediate-to-high risk PCA from low-risk PCA and could predict the upgrade of low-risk PCA as confirmed by biopsy.