Luminal Water Imaging: Comparison With Diffusion-Weighted Imaging (DWI) and PI-RADS for Characterization of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness

Simple item page
dc.coverageDOI: 10.1002/jmri.27050
dc.creatorHectors, Stefanie J.
dc.creatorSaid, Daniela
dc.creatorGnerre, Jeffrey
dc.creatorTewari, Ashutosh
dc.creatorTaouli, Bachir
dc.date2020
dc.date.accessioned2025-11-18T19:45:24Z
dc.date.available2025-11-18T19:45:24Z
dc.description<p>Background: Luminal water imaging (LWI), a multicomponent T<sub>2</sub> mapping technique, has shown promise for prostate cancer (PCa) detection and characterization. Purpose: To 1) quantify LWI parameters and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in PCa and benign peripheral zone (PZ) tissues; and 2) evaluate the diagnostic performance of LWI, ADC, and PI-RADS parameters for differentiation between low- and high-grade PCa lesions. Study Type: Prospective. Subjects: Twenty-six PCa patients undergoing prostatectomy (mean age 59 years, range 46–72 years). Field Strength/Sequence: Multiparametric MRI at 3.0T, including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and LWI T<sub>2</sub> mapping. Assessment: LWI parameters and ADC were quantified in index PCa lesions and benign PZ. Statistical Tests: Differences in MRI parameters between PCa and benign PZ were assessed using Wilcoxon signed tests. Spearman correlation of pathological grade group (GG) with LWI parameters, ADC, and PI-RADS was evaluated. The utility of each of the parameters for differentiation between low-grade (GG ≤2) and high-grade (GG ≥3) PCa was determined by Mann–Whitney U tests and ROC analyses. Results: Twenty-six index lesions were analyzed (mean size 1.7 ± 0.8 cm, GG: 1 [n = 1; 4%], 2 [n = 14, 54%], 3 [n = 8, 31%], 5 [n = 3, 12%]). LWI parameters and ADC both showed high diagnostic performance for differentiation between benign PZ and PCa (highest area under the curve [AUC] for LWI parameter T<sub>2,short</sub> [AUC = 0.98, P &lt; 0.001]). The LWI parameters luminal water fraction (LWF) and amplitude of long T<sub>2</sub> component A<sub>long</sub> significantly correlated with GG (r = –0.441, P = 0.024 and r = –0.414, P = 0.036, respectively), while PI-RADS, ADC, and the other LWI parameters did not (P = 0.132–0.869). LWF and A<sub>long</sub> also showed significant differences between low-grade and high-grade PCa (AUC = 0.776, P = 0.008 and AUC = 0.758, P = 0.027, respectively). Maximum diagnostic performance for discrimination of high-grade PCa was found with combined LWI parameters (AUC 0.891, P = 0.001). Data Conclusion: LWI parameters, in particular in combination, showed superior diagnostic performance for differentiation between low-grade and high-grade PCa compared to ADC and PI-RADS assessment. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;52:271–279.</p>eng
dc.identifierhttps://investigadores.uandes.cl/en/publications/644a3d87-2d3a-4c7d-9a3d-702869b312ab
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.uandes.cl/handle/uandes/53951
dc.languageeng
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
dc.sourcevol.52 (2020) date: 2020-07-01 nr.1 p.271-279
dc.subjectdiffusion-weighted imaging
dc.subjectluminal water imaging
dc.subjectprostate cancer
dc.subjectSDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
dc.titleLuminal Water Imaging: Comparison With Diffusion-Weighted Imaging (DWI) and PI-RADS for Characterization of Prostate Cancer Aggressivenesseng
dc.typeEditorialeng
dc.typeEditorialspa
Files
Collections
PURE