Assessment of naive indolent lymphoma using whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging and T2-weighted MRI: results of a prospective study in 30 patients.
Adult
Aged
Biopsy
Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging
/ methods
Female
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
Humans
Lymphoma
/ diagnostic imaging
Male
Middle Aged
Multimodal Imaging
/ methods
Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography
/ methods
Prospective Studies
Radiopharmaceuticals
Sensitivity and Specificity
Whole Body Imaging
/ methods
Young Adult
Diffusion-weighted imaging with background body signal suppression
Indolent lymphoma
T2-weighted short-tau inversion recovery MRI
Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging
Journal
Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society
ISSN: 1470-7330
Titre abrégé: Cancer Imaging
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101172931
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 Jan 2021
07 Jan 2021
Historique:
received:
30
04
2020
accepted:
11
12
2020
entrez:
8
1
2021
pubmed:
9
1
2021
medline:
25
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
We prospectively evaluated the diagnostic utility of whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging with background body signal suppression and T2-weighted short-tau inversion recovery MRI (WB-DWIBS/STIR) for the pretherapeutic staging of indolent lymphoma in 30 patients. This prospective study included 30 treatment-naive patients with indolent lymphomas who underwent WB-DWIBS/STIR and conventional imaging workup plus biopsy. The pretherapeutic staging agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of WB-DWIBS/STIR were investigated with reference to the multimodality and multidisciplinary consensus review for nodal and extranodal lesions excluding bone marrow. In the pretherapeutic staging, WB-DWIBS/STIR showed very good agreement (κ = 0.96; confidence interval [CI], 0.88-1.00), high sensitivity (93.4-95.1%), and high specificity (99.0-99.4%) for the whole-body regions. These results were similar to those of WB-DWIBS/STIR is an effective modality for the pretherapeutic staging of indolent lymphoma, and it has benefits when evaluating extranodal lesions, compared with
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
We prospectively evaluated the diagnostic utility of whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging with background body signal suppression and T2-weighted short-tau inversion recovery MRI (WB-DWIBS/STIR) for the pretherapeutic staging of indolent lymphoma in 30 patients.
METHODS
METHODS
This prospective study included 30 treatment-naive patients with indolent lymphomas who underwent WB-DWIBS/STIR and conventional imaging workup plus biopsy. The pretherapeutic staging agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of WB-DWIBS/STIR were investigated with reference to the multimodality and multidisciplinary consensus review for nodal and extranodal lesions excluding bone marrow.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In the pretherapeutic staging, WB-DWIBS/STIR showed very good agreement (κ = 0.96; confidence interval [CI], 0.88-1.00), high sensitivity (93.4-95.1%), and high specificity (99.0-99.4%) for the whole-body regions. These results were similar to those of
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
WB-DWIBS/STIR is an effective modality for the pretherapeutic staging of indolent lymphoma, and it has benefits when evaluating extranodal lesions, compared with
Identifiants
pubmed: 33413685
doi: 10.1186/s40644-020-00371-6
pii: 10.1186/s40644-020-00371-6
pmc: PMC7791993
doi:
Substances chimiques
Radiopharmaceuticals
0
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
0Z5B2CJX4D
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
5Références
Eur J Radiol. 2016 Feb;85(2):313-8
pubmed: 26781135
Eur Radiol. 2018 Mar;28(3):1187-1193
pubmed: 29018927
Hell J Nucl Med. 2014 Jan-Apr;17 Suppl 1:40-9
pubmed: 24392468
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008 Aug;35(8):1424-30
pubmed: 18418594
Onco Targets Ther. 2018 Jun 20;11:3597-3608
pubmed: 29950864
CA Cancer J Clin. 2005 Nov-Dec;55(6):368-76
pubmed: 16282281
Lancet Respir Med. 2019 Jun;7(6):523-532
pubmed: 31080129
Leukemia. 2016 Jun;30(6):1446-8
pubmed: 26648535
Clin Cancer Res. 2014 Jun 1;20(11):2984-93
pubmed: 24696320
Eur Radiol. 2008 Sep;18(9):1937-52
pubmed: 18446344
Magn Reson Imaging. 2016 Sep;34(7):922-31
pubmed: 27114337
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Sep;197(3):W384-91
pubmed: 21862763
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Jul 20;23(21):4643-51
pubmed: 15837966
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Mar;192(3):745-53
pubmed: 19234273
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014 Jul;40(1):26-36
pubmed: 24307538
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Jan;194(1):W91-W103
pubmed: 20028897
BMC Cancer. 2017 May 2;17(1):299
pubmed: 28464835
Cancer. 2007 Aug 1;110(3):652-9
pubmed: 17582800
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Sep 20;32(27):3059-68
pubmed: 25113753
N Engl J Med. 2007 Nov 29;357(22):2277-84
pubmed: 18046031
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002 May;178(5):1117-22
pubmed: 11959712
Radiat Med. 2004 Jul-Aug;22(4):275-82
pubmed: 15468951
Eur Radiol. 2001;11(1):80-95
pubmed: 11194923
Eur J Haematol. 2007 Sep;79(3):205-9
pubmed: 17662066
Br J Radiol. 2012 Jan;85(1009):81-92
pubmed: 22096219
Diagnostics (Basel). 2018 Jul 09;8(3):
pubmed: 29987207
Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2015;2015:104794
pubmed: 26798331
Ann Oncol. 2006 Dec;17(12):1761-5
pubmed: 16980600
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Mar;196(3):662-9
pubmed: 21343511
Hematol Oncol. 2020 Feb;38(1):12-21
pubmed: 31486520
Eur Radiol. 2013 Aug;23(8):2271-8
pubmed: 23591618
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017 Apr;45(4):1082-1089
pubmed: 27603267
Blood. 2007 Nov 15;110(10):3507-16
pubmed: 17709603
Haematologica. 2007 Jan;92(1):50-5
pubmed: 17229635
Acta Radiol. 2011 Mar 1;52(2):173-80
pubmed: 21498346
Eur Radiol. 2010 Aug;20(8):2027-38
pubmed: 20309558
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Apr;192(4):980-6
pubmed: 19304704
Health Technol Assess. 2007 Dec;11(50):iii, ix-51
pubmed: 18021577