{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04239284032030146, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03297220913801225, 'mean_word_length': 5.6375, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Can the apparent diffusion coefficient differentiate the grade of endometrioid adenocarcinoma and the histological subtype of endometrial cancer?

Background Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) provides useful information for the identification of benign and malignant uterine lesions. However, the use of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for histopathological grading of endometrial cancer is controversial. Purpose To explore the use of ADC values in differentiating the preoperative tumor grading of endometrioid adenocarcinomas and investigate the relationship between the ADC values of endometrial cancer and the histological tumor subtype. Material and Methods We retrospectively evaluated 98 patients with endometrial cancers, including both endometrioid adenocarcinomas (n = 80) and non-endometrioid adenocarcinomas (n = 18). All patients underwent DWI procedures and ADC values were calculated. The Kruskal–Wallis test and the independent samples Mann–Whitney U test were used to compare differences in the ADC values between different tumor grades and different histological subtypes. Results The mean ADC values (ADCmean) for high-grade endometrioid adenocarcinomas were significantly lower than the values for low-grade tumors (0.800 versus 0.962 × 10–3 mm2/s) (P = 0.002). However, no significant differences in ADCmean and minimum ADC values (ADCmin) were found between tumor grades (G1, G2, and G3) of endometrial cancer. Compared with endometrioid adenocarcinomas, the adenocarcinoma with squamous differentiation showed lower ADC values (mean/minimum = 0.863/0.636 versus 0.962/0.689 × 10–3 mm2/s), but the differences were not significant (Pmean = 0.074, Pmin = 0.441). Moreover, ADCmean for carcinosarcomas was significantly higher than the value for G3 non-carcinosarcoma endometrial cancers (1.047 versus 0.823 × 10–3 mm2/s) (P = 0.001). Conclusion The ADCmean was useful for identifying high-grade and low-grade endometrioid adenocarcinomas. Additionally, squamous differentiation may decrease ADCmean and ADCmin of endometrioid adenocarcinoma, and carcinosarcomas showed relatively high ADCmean.