PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the utility of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for prediction and early detection of treatment response in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging studies were performed on 40 patients with newly diagnosed HNSCC before, during, and after the end of chemoradiation therapy. Analysis was done on data from 33 patients after exclusion of 7 patients that had incomplete data. RESULTS: Pretreatment ADC value of complete responders (1.04 +/- 0.19 x 10(-3) mm2/s) was significantly lower (P < 0.05) than that from partial responders (1.35 +/- 0.30 x 10(-3) mm2/s). A significant increase in ADC was observed in complete responders within 1 week of treatment (P < 0.01), which remained high until the end of the treatment. The complete responders also showed significantly higher increase in ADC than the partial responders by the first week of chemoradiation (P < 0.01). When pretreatment ADC value was used for predicting treatment response, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.80 with a sensitivity of 65% and a specificity of 86%. However, change in ADC within the first week of chemoradiation therapy resulted in an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.88 with 86% sensitivity and 83% specificity for prediction of treatment response. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that ADC can be used as a marker for prediction and early detection of response to concurrent chemoradiation therapy in HNSCC.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the utility of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for prediction and early detection of treatment response in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging studies were performed on 40 patients with newly diagnosed HNSCC before, during, and after the end of chemoradiation therapy. Analysis was done on data from 33 patients after exclusion of 7 patients that had incomplete data. RESULTS: Pretreatment ADC value of complete responders (1.04 +/- 0.19 x 10(-3) mm2/s) was significantly lower (P < 0.05) than that from partial responders (1.35 +/- 0.30 x 10(-3) mm2/s). A significant increase in ADC was observed in complete responders within 1 week of treatment (P < 0.01), which remained high until the end of the treatment. The complete responders also showed significantly higher increase in ADC than the partial responders by the first week of chemoradiation (P < 0.01). When pretreatment ADC value was used for predicting treatment response, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.80 with a sensitivity of 65% and a specificity of 86%. However, change in ADC within the first week of chemoradiation therapy resulted in an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.88 with 86% sensitivity and 83% specificity for prediction of treatment response. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that ADC can be used as a marker for prediction and early detection of response to concurrent chemoradiation therapy in HNSCC.
Authors: Amita Shukla-Dave; Harish Poptani; Laurie A Loevner; Anthony Mancuso; Hacene Serrai; David I Rosenthal; Alexandra M Kilger; David S Nelson; Kristen L Zakian; Fernando Arias-Mendoza; Mark Rijpkema; Jason A Koutcher; Truman R Brown; Arend Heerschap; Jerry D Glickson Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: J Wang; S Takashima; F Takayama; S Kawakami; A Saito; T Matsushita; M Momose; T Ishiyama Journal: Radiology Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: R K Gupta; T F Cloughesy; U Sinha; J Garakian; J Lazareff; G Rubino; L Rubino; D P Becker; H V Vinters; J R Alger Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: A M Chinnaiyan; U Prasad; S Shankar; D A Hamstra; M Shanaiah; T L Chenevert; B D Ross; A Rehemtulla Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2000-02-15 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: T L Chenevert; L D Stegman; J M Taylor; P L Robertson; H S Greenberg; A Rehemtulla; B D Ross Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-12-20 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Hans-Juergen Raatschen; Gerhard H Simon; Yanjun Fu; Barbara Sennino; David M Shames; Michael F Wendland; Donald M McDonald; Robert C Brasch Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-03-27 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ann D King; Frankie K F Mo; Kwok-Hung Yu; David K W Yeung; Hua Zhou; Kunwar S Bhatia; Gary M K Tse; Alexander C Vlantis; Jeffrey K T Wong; Anil T Ahuja Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2010-03-23 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Craig J Galbán; Stefanie Galbán; Marcian E Van Dort; Gary D Luker; Mahaveer S Bhojani; Alnawaz Rehemtulla; Brian D Ross Journal: Prog Mol Biol Transl Sci Date: 2010 Impact factor: 3.622
Authors: M Ravanelli; A Grammatica; M Maddalo; M Ramanzin; G M Agazzi; E Tononcelli; S Battocchio; P Bossi; M Vezzoli; R Maroldi; D Farina Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-07-30 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Reza Farjam; Christina I Tsien; Felix Y Feng; Diana Gomez-Hassan; James A Hayman; Theodore S Lawrence; Yue Cao Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2013-12-09 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Pietro Valerio Foti; Antonio Longo; Michele Reibaldi; Andrea Russo; Giuseppe Privitera; Corrado Spatola; Luigi Raffaele; Vincenzo Salamone; Renato Farina; Stefano Palmucci; Andrea Musumeci; Rosario Caltabiano; Marco Ragusa; Cesare Mariotti; Teresio Avitabile; Pietro Milone; Giovanni Carlo Ettorre Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2016-10-17 Impact factor: 3.469