Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/12732
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChang, Joe H-
dc.contributor.authorLim Joon, Daryl-
dc.contributor.authorDavis, Ian D-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Sze Ting-
dc.contributor.authorHiew, Chee-Yan-
dc.contributor.authorEsler, Stephen-
dc.contributor.authorGong, Sylvia J-
dc.contributor.authorWada, Morikatsu-
dc.contributor.authorClouston, David-
dc.contributor.authorO'Sullivan, Richard-
dc.contributor.authorGoh, Yin P-
dc.contributor.authorBolton, Damien M-
dc.contributor.authorScott, Andrew M-
dc.contributor.authorKhoo, Vincent-
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-16T02:27:52Z
dc.date.available2015-05-16T02:27:52Z
dc.date.issued2015-04-08-
dc.identifier.citationInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics 2015; 92(2): 438-45en_US
dc.identifier.otherPUBMEDen
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/12732en
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of [(11)C]choline positron emission tomography (CHOL-PET) with that of the combination of T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted (T2W/DW) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for delineating malignant intraprostatic lesions (IPLs) for guiding focal therapies and to investigate factors predicting the accuracy of CHOL-PET.This study included 21 patients who underwent CHOL-PET and T2W/DW MRI prior to radical prostatectomy. Two observers manually delineated IPL contours for each scan, and automatic IPL contours were generated on CHOL-PET based on varying proportions of the maximum standardized uptake value (SUV). IPLs identified on prostatectomy specimens defined reference standard contours. The imaging-based contours were compared with the reference standard contours using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), and sensitivity and specificity values. Factors that could potentially predict the DSC of the best contouring method were analyzed using linear models.The best automatic contouring method, 60% of the maximum SUV (SUV60) , had similar correlations (DSC: 0.59) with the manual PET contours (DSC: 0.52, P=.127) and significantly better correlations than the manual MRI contours (DSC: 0.37, P<.001). The sensitivity and specificity values were 72% and 71% for SUV60; 53% and 86% for PET manual contouring; and 28% and 92% for MRI manual contouring. The tumor volume and transition zone pattern could independently predict the accuracy of CHOL-PET.CHOL-PET is superior to the combination of T2W/DW MRI for delineating IPLs. The accuracy of CHOL-PET is insufficient for gland-sparing focal therapies but may be accurate enough for focal boost therapies. The transition zone pattern is a new classification that may predict how well CHOL-PET delineates IPLs.en_US
dc.language.isoenen
dc.titleComparison of [(11)C]choline Positron Emission Tomography With T2- and Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Delineating Malignant Intraprostatic Lesions.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physicsen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationDiagnostic Imaging, Monash Health, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationUniversity of Melbourne, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationHealthcare Imaging, Epworth Hospital, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationTissupath, Mt Waverley, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationRadiologyen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationUrologyen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationCentre for PET, Austin Health, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationRoyal Marsden Hospital, National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Monash University, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationLudwig Institute for Cancer Research, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationRadiation Oncologyen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationMonash University Eastern Health Clinical School, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.02.004en_US
dc.relation.urlhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25864171en
dc.type.contentTexten_US
dc.type.austinJournal Articleen
local.name.researcherBolton, Damien M
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
crisitem.author.deptRadiation Oncology-
crisitem.author.deptMolecular Imaging and Therapy-
crisitem.author.deptRadiation Oncology-
crisitem.author.deptOlivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre-
crisitem.author.deptUrology-
crisitem.author.deptMolecular Imaging and Therapy-
crisitem.author.deptOlivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

78
checked on Dec 27, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.