Abstract:Objective To evaluate the diagnostic value of mono-exponential, bi-exponential, and stretched-exponential models of DWI in prostate cancer.Methods A retrospective study were performed in 34 patients with pathologically confirmed prostate cancer (n=18) and benign prostatic hypertrophy (n=16).Twenty eight prostate cancer ROIs, 36 stromal benign prostatic hyperplasia ROIs and 30 normal peripheral zone ROIs were analyzed.FSE T2WI, FSE T1WI and muti-b DWI were performed in all patients.ROIs were placed within the proven prostate cancer, stromal benign prostatic hyperplasia and normal peripheral zone.The parameters of mono-exponential (ADC), bi-exponential [slow diffusion coefficient (D), fast diffusion coefficient (D*) and perfusion fraction (f)] and stretched-exponential models [distributed diffusion coefficient (DDC) and stretching parameter (α)] were recorded.The mean signal intensities of every ROI at different b values were recorded in order to assess the goodness of fit for different models.The adjusted r2 was calculated to assess the goodness of fit for different models.Variance analysis and q test were used to compare the values of r2 among groups.One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the different parameters.ROC curve was performed to evaluate the diagnosis value of different parameters in prostate cancer.Results The adjusted r2 were all statistically different among three models in prostate cancer, stromal benign prostatic hyperplasia, and normal peripheral zone (all P＜ 0.05).The r2 ofbi-exponential and stretched-exponential models achieved significantly better fitting of DWI signal than the mono-exponential model (all P＜0.05).The ADC value of prostate cancer, stromal benign prostatic hyperplasia and normal peripheral zone were (0.852±0.169) × 10-3, (1.443±0.201)×10-3, (1.994±0.184) × 10-3mm2/s, respectively.The D value were (0.658 ±0.151) × 10-3, (1.149±0.171) × 10-3, (1.689±0.238) × 10-3mm2/s, respectively.DDC were (0.618±0.258) × 10-3, (1.431 ±0.329) × 10-3, (2.134±0.213) × 10-3mm2/s, respectively.α were 0.725±0.075, 0.773±0.056, 0.847±0.075, respectively.All had statistical difference (all P＜ 0.05).The area under curve (AUC) of ADC, D, DDC and α in prostate cancer diagnosis were 0.995, 0.991, 0.984, 0.773.When the cutoff were 1.100× 10-3mm2/s, 0.900 × 10-3mm2/s, 1.100 × 10-3mm2/s, and 0.727 for ADC, D, DDC, and α, the sensitivity and specificity were 92.86％, 98.48％;92.86％, 98.48％;100.00％, 92.42％;57.14％, 86.36％;respectively.Conclusions Though stretched-exponential and bi-exponential models achieved better fitting of DWI signal than the mono-exponential model, the ADC shows equal diagnosis value compared with D and DDC.The bi-exponential and stretched-exponential model can serve a supplement to mono-exponential model.

Application Value of Mathematical Models of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Differentiating Breast Cancer Lesions.

Predictive Ability of DWI/ADC and DCE-MRI Kinetic Parameters in Differentiating Benign from Malignant Breast Lesions and in Building a Prediction Model.

Limited role of DWI with apparent diffusion coefficient mapping in breast lesions presenting as non-mass enhancement on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI

Multiparametric diffusion-weighted imaging in breast lesions: Association with pathologic diagnosis and prognostic factors.

Assessment of different mathematical models for diffusion-weighted imaging as quantitative biomarkers for differentiating benign from malignant solid hepatic lesions.

Multiple b-value diffusion-weighted imaging in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions: comparison of conventional mono-, bi- and stretched exponential models.

Application of advanced diffusion models from diffusion weighted imaging in a large cohort study of breast lesions

Different Mathematical Models of Diffusion-Weighted MR Imaging in Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer

Application of Monoexponential, Biexponential, and Stretched-Exponential Models of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Differential Diagnosis of Metastases and Myeloma in the Spine-Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of Related Parameters.

Value of Diffusion Weighted Imaging Based on Monoexponential and Biexponential Model in the Differential Diagnosis Between Benign and Malignant Liver Neoplasms

Comparison of the Diagnostic Value of Monoexponential, Biexponential, and Stretched Exponential Diffusion-weighted MRI in Differentiating Tumor Stage and Histological Grade of Bladder Cancer.

Analysis of diagnostic value of DCE-MRI and DWI in breast cancer

Application of Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging on the Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

The application value of monoexponential,biexponential models multiple b values DWI in pancreatic cancer

Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Mr Imaging In Breast Cancer: Quantitative Analysis For Characterizing Lesions

Use of monoexponential diffusion-weighted imaging and diffusion kurtosis imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced-MRI for the differentiation of spinal tumors

Differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast masses using diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging

Multiple mathematical models of diffusion-weighted imaging for endometrial cancer characterization: Correlation with prognosis-related risk factors

Comparison of stretched-exponential and monoexponential models of diffusion-weighted imaging between prostate cancer and normal tissues

Comparison of Stretched‐exponential and Monoexponential Model Diffusion‐weighted Imaging in Prostate Cancer and Normal Tissues

Comparing of Mono-Exponential, Bi-Exponential and Stretched Exponential Models with Multi-B Value Diffusion Weighed Imaging in Uterus Malignancies¡apilot Study