Uterine Cervical Carcinoma: Evaluation Using Non-Gaussian Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging and Its Correlation With Histopathological Findings.
Adult
Aged, 80 and over
Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Female
Humans
Lymphatic Metastasis
/ diagnostic imaging
Neoplasm Grading
Neoplasm Invasiveness
Observer Variation
Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted
/ methods
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
/ diagnostic imaging
Journal
Journal of computer assisted tomography
ISSN: 1532-3145
Titre abrégé: J Comput Assist Tomogr
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7703942
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
pubmed:
20
6
2020
medline:
29
1
2021
entrez:
20
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of the study was to assess non-Gaussian diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI)'s usefulness as a noninvasive method to evaluate tumor invasion depth, histological grade, and lymph node metastasis in cervical carcinoma (CC) patients. Twenty-two consecutive patients with histologically confirmed CC were examined by 1.5-T MRI and non-Gaussian DKI with 4 b values of 0, 500, 1000, and 2000 s/mm2. Kurtosis (K), diffusivity (D), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps were compared with histopathological findings. Kurtosis maps revealed the fibrous stroma as a distinct high K zone (1.442 ± 0.373) that was significantly different from values of the cervical mucosa, outer stroma, and parametrium (0.648 ± 0.083, 0.715 ± 0.113, and 0.504 ± 0.060, respectively, P < 0.0001). Kurtosis (1.189 ± 0.228) and D (0.961 ± 0.198 × 10-3 mm2/s) values of all CCs were significantly different from those of all uterine cervical wall layers. Kurtosis and D values were significantly correlated with histological grades of CCs (r = 0.934, P < 0.0001, and r = -0.925, P < 0.0001, respectively), whereas no significant differences were found in ADC values between grades 2 and 3 CCs (P = 0.787). Metastatic and nonmetastatic lymph nodes showed significantly different K (P < 0.0001) and D (P < 0.0001) values; however, their ADC values did not show significant differences (P = 0.437). For differentiating grade 3 CCs from grade 1 or 2 CCs, the areas under the curve for K (0.991, P = 0.0375) and D (0.982, P = 0.0337) values were significantly higher than those for ADC values (0.759). For differentiating metastatic and nonmetastatic lymph nodes, the areas under the curve for K (0.974, P = 0.0028) and D (0.968, P = 0.0018) values were significantly higher than those for ADC (0.596). Non-Gaussian DKI may be clinically useful for noninvasive evaluation of tumor invasion depth, histological grade, and lymph node metastasis in CC patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32558770
pii: 00004728-202101000-00007
doi: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000001042
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
29-36Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
I.Y. has received the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) of MEXT, Japan (15K09915). The other authors declare no conflict of interest.
Références
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69:7–34.
Intaraphet S, Kasatpibal N, Siriaunkgul S, et al. Prognostic impact of histology in patients with cervical squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma and small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14:5355–5360.
Kodama J, Seki N, Masahiro S, et al. Prognostic factors in stage IB-IIB cervical adenocarcinoma patients treated with radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. J Surg Oncol. 2010;101:413–417.
Kasamatsu T, Sasajima Y, Onda T, et al. Surgical treatment for neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2007;99:225–228.
Logsdon MD, Eifel PJ. Figo IIIB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: an analysis of prognostic factors emphasizing the balance between external beam and intracavitary radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;43:763–775.
Wagner AE, Pappas L, Ghia AJ, et al. Impact of tumor size on survival in cancer of the cervix and validation of stage IIA1 and IIA2 subdivisions. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;129:517–521.
Sala E, Rockall AG, Freeman SJ, et al. The added role of MR imaging in treatment stratification of patients with gynecologic malignancies: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiology. 2013;266:717–740.
Kundu S, Chopra S, Verma A, et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging in cervical cancer: current evidence and future directions. J Cancer Res Ther. 2012;8:11–18.
Liu Y, Ye Z, Sun H, et al. Grading of uterine cervical cancer by using the ADC difference value and its correlation with microvascular density and vascular endothelial growth factor. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:757–765.
Zhou Y, Liu J, Liu C, et al. Intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion weighted MRI of cervical cancer - correlated with tumor differentiation and perfusion. Magn Reson Imaging. 2016;34:1050–1056.
Raab P, Hattingen E, Franz K, et al. Cerebral gliomas: diffusional kurtosis imaging analysis of microstructural differences. Radiology. 2010;254:876–881.
Van Cauter S, Veraart J, Sijbers J, et al. Gliomas: diffusion kurtosis MR imaging in grading. Radiology. 2012;263:492–501.
Rosenkrantz AB, Sigmund EE, Johnson G, et al. Prostate cancer: feasibility and preliminary experience of a diffusional kurtosis model for detection and assessment of aggressiveness of peripheral zone cancer. Radiology. 2012;264:126–135.
Rosenkrantz AB, Padhani AR, Chenevert TL, et al. Body diffusion kurtosis imaging: basic principles, applications, and considerations for clinical practice. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;42:1190–1202.
Sun K, Chen X, Chai W, et al. Breast cancer: diffusion kurtosis MR imaging-diagnostic accuracy and correlation with clinical-pathologic factors. Radiology. 2015;277:46–55.
Jensen JH, Helpern JA, Ramani A, et al. Diffusional kurtosis imaging: the quantification of non-Gaussian water diffusion by means of magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2005;53:1432–1440.
Jensen JH, Helpern JA. MRI quantification of non-Gaussian water diffusion by kurtosis analysis. NMR Biomed. 2010;23:698–710.
Yamada I, Yoshino N, Hikishima K, et al. Oral carcinoma: clinical evaluation using diffusion kurtosis imaging and its correlation with histopathologic findings. Magn Reson Imaging. 2018;51:69–78.
Yamada I, Sakamoto J, Kobayashi D, et al. Diffusion kurtosis imaging of endometrial carcinoma: correlation with histopathological findings. Magn Reson Imaging. 2019;57:337–346.
Wang P, Thapa D, Wu G, et al. A study on diffusion and kurtosis features of cervical cancer based on non-Gaussian diffusion weighted model. Magn Reson Imaging. 2018;47:60–66.
Winfield JM, Orton MR, Collins DJ, et al. Separation of type and grade in cervical tumours using non-mono-exponential models of diffusion-weighted MRI. Eur Radiol. 2017;27:627–636.
Sakamoto J, Kuribayashi A, Kotaki S, et al. Application of diffusion kurtosis imaging to odontogenic lesions: analysis of the cystic component. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2016;44:1565–1571.
Wiebe E, Denny L, Thomas G. Cancer of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2012;119 suppl 2:S100–S109.
Yamada I, Wakana K, Kobayashi D, et al. Endometrial carcinoma: evaluation using diffusion-tensor imaging and its correlation with histopathologic findings. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019;50:250–260.
Levy A, Medjhoul A, Caramella C, et al. Interest of diffusion-weighted echo-planar MR imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient mapping in gynecological malignancies: a review. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;33:1020–1027.
Klerkx WM, Veldhuis WB, Spijkerboer AM, et al. The value of 3.0Tesla diffusion-weighted MRI for pelvic nodal staging in patients with early stage cervical cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48:3414–3421.
He XQ, Wei LN. Diagnostic value of lymph node metastasis by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in cervical cancer. J Cancer Res Ther. 2016;12:77–83.
Song J, Hu Q, Huang J, et al. Combining tumor size and diffusion-weighted imaging to diagnose normal-sized metastatic pelvic lymph nodes in cervical cancers. Acta Radiol. 2019;60:388–395.
Liu Y, Bai R, Sun H, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of uterine cervical cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2009;33:858–862.
Kuang F, Ren J, Zhong Q, et al. The value of apparent diffusion coefficient in the assessment of cervical cancer. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:1050–1058.
Gladwish A, Milosevic M, Fyles A, et al. Association of apparent diffusion coefficient with disease recurrence in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with radical chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Radiology. 2016;279:158–166.