Triage of low-risk prostate cancer patients with PSA levels 10 ng/mL or less: Comparison of apparent diffusion coefficient value and transrectal ultrasound-guided target biopsy

10Citations
Citations of this article
40Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to identify low-risk prostate cancer on the basis of the D'Amico clinical risk score in patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels 10 ng/mL or less who had undergone radical prostatectomy by comparing apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided target biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS. In the preliminary study, we used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and determined the cutoff ADC to identify prostate cancer with a Gleason score of 6 or less for 117 patients. In the primary study, we assessed the combination of routine MRI (T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging) plus the cutoff ADC value ("method A") to identify low-risk prostate cancer for another 89 patients. Their diagnostic value was compared with that of routine MRI combined with the Gleason score obtained from TRUS-guided target biopsies ("method B"). RESULTS. The preliminary study showed that a mean ADC of 1.04 × 10-3 mm2/s was the best cutoff. In the primary study, accuracy was statistically higher with method A for each reader ( p = 0.041). CONCLUSION. In patients with PSA levels 10 ng/mL or less, the combination of MRI findings plus the cutoff ADC is significantly more accurate for the identification of low-risk prostate cancer than is the combination of MRI followed by TRUS-guided target biopsy. © American Roentgen Ray Society.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Itatani, R., Namimoto, T., Kajihara, H., Katahira, K., Kitani, K., Hamada, Y., & Yamashita, Y. (2014). Triage of low-risk prostate cancer patients with PSA levels 10 ng/mL or less: Comparison of apparent diffusion coefficient value and transrectal ultrasound-guided target biopsy. American Journal of Roentgenology, 202(5), 1051–1057. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.13.11602

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free