Validation of SE-EPI-based T2 mapping for characterization of prostate cancer: a new method compared with the traditional CPMG method
- 55 Downloads
We aim to compare the results of spin echo–echo planar imaging (SE-EPI)-based T2 mapping with those of the conventional Carr–Purcell–Meiboom–Gill (CPMG) method and to investigate the potential validity of SE-EPI-T2 mapping for the characterization of prostate cancer (PCa).
Our retrospective study included 42 PCa patients and 42 noncancer patients who underwent 3.0T MRI with b values ranging from 0 to 2000 s/mm2 and echo times (TEs) ranging from 32 to 100 ms before biopsies. Bland–Altman analysis was used to compare the agreement between the two methods. The correlations between CPMG-T2 values and SE-EPI-T2 values at different b values were determined by Spearman’s rho analysis or Pearson analysis. The Mann–Whitney U test and two-sample t tests were used to analyze the differences between the cancerous and noncancerous groups.
Substantial agreement regarding the measurements was observed between the two methods. The average correlation between the CPMG-T2 values and SE-EPI-T2 values was moderate and positive, and the best correlations were found at b = 200 s/mm2 in the noncancer group (r = 0.557, P = 0.000) and at b = 100 s/mm2 in the cancer group (r = 0.537, P = 0.000). In addition, statistically significant differences were found between the noncancer and cancer groups in T2 values and ADC values (diff TEs) (P = 0.000).
Substantial agreement in the measurements was found between the SE-EPI method and CPMG method. SE-EPI-based T2 mapping has potential clinical value for the prostate and can be considered an alternative to the traditional CPMG-T2 mapping method.
KeywordsDiffusion magnetic resonance imaging Echo planar imaging Magnetic resonance imaging Prostate cancer T2 mapping
We thank Xu Yan and his team from the MR Collaboration NE Asia, Siemens Healthcare, for providing the scan guide and settings.
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [Grant Numbers 81671656 and 81171307].
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Xu Yan is an employee of Siemens Healthcare but had no control over the inclusion of any data or information that might have presented a conflict of interest. There are no actual or potential conflicts of interest to declare in relation to this article. None of the other authors have conflicts of interest or specific financial interests relevant to the subject of this article.
- 4.Lin WC, Westphalen AC, Silva GE, Chodraui Filho S, Reis RB, Muglia VF. (2016) Comparison of PI-RADS 2, ADC histogram-derived parameters, and their combination for the diagnosis of peripheral zone prostate cancer. Abdom Radiol (NY) 11:2209-2217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0826-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Katsube T, Okada M, Kumano S, Imaoka I, Kagawa Y, Hori M, et al. (2012) Estimation of liver function using T2* mapping on gadolinium ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol 7:1460-1464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.03.073 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Hada S, Ishijima M, Kaneko H, Kinoshita M, Liu L, Sadatsuki R, et al. (2017) Association of medial meniscal extrusion with medial tibial osteophyte distance detected by T2 mapping MRI in patients with early-stage knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Res Ther 1:201. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13075-017-1411-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Liney GP, Knowles AJ, Manton DJ, Turnbull LW, Blackband SJ, Horsman A. (1996) Comparison of conventional single echo and multi-echo sequences with a fast spin-echo sequence for quantitative T2 mapping: application to the prostate. J Magn Reson Imaging 4:603-607. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.1880060408 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Yan X, Ke Z, Zhou MX, Fu CX, Min XD, Wang L. (2017) Application of fast SE-EPI-based T2 mapping in prostate, with comparison to conventional CPMG-based T2 mapping. Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of ISMRM; 2017 Apr 22-27; Honolulu, Hawaii, United States. Concord (CA): ISMRM Press; 2017. Abstract: 3418. https://indexsmart.mirasmart.com/ISMRM2017/PDFfiles/3418.html#_parent
- 18.Zhou MX, Ke Z, Min XD, Wang L, Ma C, Yan X. (2017) Validation of fast SE-EPI T2 mapping with reference to conventional CPMG T2 mapping, and its application in prostate cancer. Proceedings of the 10th International Congress on Image and Signal Processing, BioMedical Engineering and Informatics (CISP-BMEI); 2017 Oct 14-16; Shanghai, China. New York (NY): IEEE Press; 2018. Pages: 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1109/CISP-BMEI.2017.8302183
- 20.Baco E, Ukimura O, Rud E, Vlatkovic L, Svindland A, Aron M, et al. (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging-transectal ultrasound image-fusion biopsies accurately characterize the index tumor: correlation with step-sectioned radical prostatectomy specimens in 135 patients. Eur Urol 67:787–794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.077 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Kim HK, Laor T, Horn PS, Wong B. (2010) Quantitative assessment of the T2 relaxation time of the gluteus muscles in children with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a comparative study before and after steroid treatment. Korean J Radiol 3:304-311. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2010.11.3.304 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Truong H, Stamatakis L, Vourganti S, Nix J, et al. (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. Eur Urol 5:713-719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.059 CrossRefGoogle Scholar