[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-332903-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-332903-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","utility-of-quantitative-measurement-of-t2-using-restriction-spectrum-imaging-for-detection-of-clinically-significant-prostate-cancer","Utility of quantitative measurement of T2 using restriction spectrum imaging for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer","","Restriction Spectrum Imaging restriction score (RSIrs) improves the accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) diagnosis compared with standard diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). This retrospective study assesses whether prostate T2 varies across RSI compartments and whether csPCa detection improves when multiple scans at different echo times estimate compartmental T2 (cT2). Two cohorts used 3T multi-b-value diffusion sequences acquired at multiple TEs. cT2 was computed from multi-TE RSI data and compared across compartments, while csPCa detection was evaluated using RSIrs and logistic regression, with statistical testing via t-tests and ROC AUC analysis.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/utility-of-quantitative-measurement-of-t2-using-restriction-spectrum-imaging-for-detection-of-clinically-significant-prostate-cancer/332903/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/utility-of-quantitative-measurement-of-t2-using-restriction-spectrum-imaging-for-detection-of-clinically-significant-prostate-cancer/332903.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Genevieve","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-31","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",12,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What was the purpose of measuring T2 with restriction spectrum imaging in this study?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The study aimed to test whether prostate T2 changes across RSI compartments and whether estimating compartmental T2 (cT2) can improve clinically significant prostate cancer detection.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How were cT2 values obtained and compared?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"cT2 values were computed from multi-TE RSI data acquired from two 3T cohorts and then compared across RSI compartments (C1–C4).",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Did adding cT2 to RSIrs improve csPCa detection performance?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Significant cT2 differences were observed between normal and cancerous prostate tissue, but incorporating cT2 in addition to diffusion did not significantly improve cancer detection performance compared with RSIrs alone.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},332903,1790814458,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,120,123,127],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":124,"slug":126},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":128,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":130},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":132},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":133,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":55,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":113,"preview_page_count":4},1374391974585,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","[www. nature.com/scientificreports](www. nature.com/scientificreports)  \nOPEN  \nUtility of quantitative measurement of T2 using restriction spectrum imaging for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer  \nMariluz Rojo Domingo1,2, Christopher C. Conlin3, Roshan Karunamuni2, Courtney Ollison2, Madison T. Baxter2, Karoline Kallis2, Deondre D. Do1,2, Yuze Song2,4, Joshua Kuperman3, Ahmed S. Shabaik5, Michael E. Hahn3, Paul M. Murphy3, Rebecca Rakow-Penner3, Anders M. Dale3,6,7 & Tyler M. Seibert1,2,3,8,9􀀍  \nThe Restriction Spectrum Imaging restriction score (RSIrs) has been shown to improve the accuracy for diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) compared to standard DWI. Both diffusion and T2 properties of prostate tissue contribute to the signal measured in DWI, and studies have demonstrated that each may be valuable for distinguishing csPCa from benign tissue. The purpose of this retrospective study was to (1) determine whether prostate T2 varies across RSI compartments and in the presence of csPCa, and (2) evaluate whether csPCa detection with RSIrs is improved by acquiring multiple scans at different TEs to measure compartmental T2 (cT2) . Data includes two cohorts scanned for csPCa with 3T multi-b-value diffusion-weighted sequences acquired at multiple TEs. cT2 values were computed from multi-TE RSI data and compared by compartment. CsPCa detection was compared between RSIrs and a logistic regression model (LRM) to predict the probability of csPCausing cT2 in combination with RSI measurements. Two-sample t-tests (α = 0.05) and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were used for the statistical analyses. In both cohorts, T2 was different (p \u003C 0.05) across the four RSI compartments (C1, C2, C3, C4). Voxel-level, cohort 1:  \nT2 was different in csPCa for C1, C2, C3 (p \u003C 0.001) . Patient-level, cohort 1: T2 was different in csPCa patients in C3 (p = 0.02); cohort 2: T2 differed in csPCa patients in C1 (p = 0.01), C3 (p = 0.01) and C4 (p \u003C 0.01). Voxel-level csPCa detection: cT2 did not improve discrimination over RSIrs alone (p = 0.9) . Patient-level: RSIrs and the LRM performed better than diffusion alone (p \u003C 0.001), but the difference in AUCs between RSIrs and the LRM was not significantly different (p = 0.54) . In conclusion, significant differences in cT2 were observed between normal and cancerous prostatic tissue. With our data, however, consideration of cT2 in addition to diffusion did not significantly improve cancer detection performance.  \nKeywords Prostate, Cancer detection, T2 mapping, Restriction spectrum imaging, Diffusion-weighted imaging  \n1Department of Bioengineering, University of California San Diego Jacobs School of Engineering, La Jolla, CA, USA.  \n2Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, CA, USA. 3Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, CA, USA. 4Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of California San Diego Jacobs School of Engineering, La Jolla, CA, USA. 5Department of Pathology, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, CA, USA. 6Department of Neurosciences, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, CA, USA. 7Halıcıoğlu Data Science Institute, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA. 8Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, 9500 Gilman Drive, \\#0861, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA. 9Department of Urology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA. 􀀍 email: [tseibert@health.ucsd.edu](tseibert@health.ucsd.edu)  \n[www. nature.com/scientificreports/](www. nature.com/scientificreports/)  \nMultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has become an important tool for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa)1. MpMRI has proven to reduce unnecessary biopsies, mitigate overdiagnosis of clinically insignificant prostate cancer","cbCairXdWsJqyaMO","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCairXdWsJqyaMO","pdf",2450650,"English","# Background\n## mpMRI and the role of quantitative approaches\n# Restriction Spectrum Imaging and the study aim\n## RSI compartments and the gap in quantitative T2\n# Methods and data\n## Multi-TE RSI acquisition and cT2 computation\n## Statistical analysis and comparison models\n# Results\n## T2 differences across compartments in both cohorts\n## Impact of cT2 on csPCa discrimination\n# Conclusion","[{\"question\":\"What was the purpose of measuring T2 with restriction spectrum imaging in this study?\",\"answer\":\"The study aimed to test whether prostate T2 changes across RSI compartments and whether estimating compartmental T2 (cT2) can improve clinically significant prostate cancer detection.\"},{\"question\":\"How were cT2 values obtained and compared?\",\"answer\":\"cT2 values were computed from multi-TE RSI data acquired from two 3T cohorts and then compared across RSI compartments (C1–C4).\"},{\"question\":\"Did adding cT2 to RSIrs improve csPCa detection performance?\",\"answer\":\"Significant cT2 differences were observed between normal and cancerous prostate tissue, but incorporating cT2 in addition to diffusion did not significantly improve cancer detection performance compared with RSIrs alone.\"}]","Utility of quantitative measurement of T2 using restriction spectrum imaging for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer | PDF",1789999913]