Alexey Surov1, Daniel T Ginat2, Eser Sanverdi3, C C Tchoyoson Lim4, Bahattin Hakyemez5, Akira Yogi6, Teresa Cabada7, Andreas Wienke8. 1. Department of Radiology, Martin-Luther-University, Halle-Wittenberg, Germany; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany; University of Chicago, Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA. Electronic address: alex.surow@medizin.uni-halle.de. 2. University of Chicago, Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. 4. Department of Neuroradiology, National Neuroscience Institute, Singapore. 5. Department of Radiology, Uludag University School of Medicine, Gorukle, Bursa, Turkey. 6. Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medical Science, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa, Japan. 7. Servicio de Radiologia, Hospital de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain. 8. Institute of Medical Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Informatics, Martin-Luther-University, Halle-Wittenberg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Meningioma is the most frequent intracranial tumor and is often an incidental finding on imaging. Some imaging-based scores were suggested for differentiating low- and high-grade meningiomas. The purpose of this work was to compare diffusion-weighted imaging findings of different meningiomas in a large multicenter study by using apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values for predicting tumor grade and proliferation potential. METHODS: Data from 7 radiologic departments were acquired retrospectively. Overall, 389 patients were collected. All meningiomas were investigated by magnetic resonance imaging (1.5-T scanner) by using diffusion-weighted imaging (b values of 0 and 1000 s/mm(2)). The comparison of ADC values was performed by Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: World Health Organization grade I was diagnosed in 271 cases (69.7%), grade II in 103 (26.5%), and grade III in 15 patients (3.9%). Grade I meningiomas showed statistically significant higher ADC values (1.05 ± 0.39 × 10(-3) mm(2)s(-1)) in comparison with grade II (0.77 ± 0.15 × 10(-3) mm(2)s(-1); P = 0.001) and grade III tumors (0.79 ± 0.21 × 10(-3) mm(2)s(-1); P = 0.01). An ADC value of <0.85 × 10(-3) mm(2)s(-1) was determined as the threshold in differentiating between grade I and grade II/III meningiomas (sensitivity, 72.9%; specificity, 73.1%; accuracy, 73.0%). Ki67 was associated with ADC (r = -0.63, P < 0.001). The optimal threshold for the ADC was (less than) 0.85 × 10(-3) mm(2)s(-1) for detecting tumors with high proliferation potential (Ki67 ≥5%). CONCLUSIONS: The estimated threshold ADC value of 0.85 can differentiate grade I meningioma from grade II and III tumors. The same ADC value is helpful for detecting tumors with high proliferation potential.
BACKGROUND:Meningioma is the most frequent intracranial tumor and is often an incidental finding on imaging. Some imaging-based scores were suggested for differentiating low- and high-grade meningiomas. The purpose of this work was to compare diffusion-weighted imaging findings of different meningiomas in a large multicenter study by using apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values for predicting tumor grade and proliferation potential. METHODS: Data from 7 radiologic departments were acquired retrospectively. Overall, 389 patients were collected. All meningiomas were investigated by magnetic resonance imaging (1.5-T scanner) by using diffusion-weighted imaging (b values of 0 and 1000 s/mm(2)). The comparison of ADC values was performed by Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: World Health Organization grade I was diagnosed in 271 cases (69.7%), grade II in 103 (26.5%), and grade III in 15 patients (3.9%). Grade I meningiomas showed statistically significant higher ADC values (1.05 ± 0.39 × 10(-3) mm(2)s(-1)) in comparison with grade II (0.77 ± 0.15 × 10(-3) mm(2)s(-1); P = 0.001) and grade III tumors (0.79 ± 0.21 × 10(-3) mm(2)s(-1); P = 0.01). An ADC value of <0.85 × 10(-3) mm(2)s(-1) was determined as the threshold in differentiating between grade I and grade II/III meningiomas (sensitivity, 72.9%; specificity, 73.1%; accuracy, 73.0%). Ki67 was associated with ADC (r = -0.63, P < 0.001). The optimal threshold for the ADC was (less than) 0.85 × 10(-3) mm(2)s(-1) for detecting tumors with high proliferation potential (Ki67 ≥5%). CONCLUSIONS: The estimated threshold ADC value of 0.85 can differentiate grade I meningioma from grade II and III tumors. The same ADC value is helpful for detecting tumors with high proliferation potential.
Authors: Shun Zhang; Gloria Chia-Yi Chiang; Jacquelyn Marion Knapp; Christina M Zecca; Diana He; Rohan Ramakrishna; Rajiv S Magge; David J Pisapia; Howard Alan Fine; Apostolos John Tsiouris; Yize Zhao; Linda A Heier; Yi Wang; Ilhami Kovanlikaya Journal: J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-05-25 Impact factor: 3.447
Authors: Stefan Schob; Alexey Surov; Andreas Wienke; Hans Jonas Meyer; Rolf Peter Spielmann; Eckhard Fiedler Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 3.488