Myo Min1,2,3, Mark T Lee1,2, Peter Lin2,4,5, Lois Holloway1,2,3, Dj Wijesekera3,5, Dinesh Gooneratne2,6, Robba Rai1, Wei Xuan3, Allan Fowler1, Dion Forstner1,2,3, Gary Liney1,2,3,7. 1. 1 Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, NSW, Australia. 2. 2 South Western Clinical School, School of Medicine, University of New South Wales, NSW, Australia. 3. 3 Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW, Australia. 4. 4 Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET, Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, NSW, Australia. 5. 5 School of Science and Health, Western Sydney University, NSW, Australia. 6. 6 Department of Radiology, Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, NSW, Australia. 7. 7 Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the serial changes and correlations between readout-segmented technique with navigated phase correction diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI), R2*-MRI and (18)F-FDG positron emission tomography (PET) CT performed before and during radiation therapy (RT) in patients with mucosal primary head and neck cancer. METHODS: The mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADCmean) from DWI (at b = 50 and 800 s mm(-2)), the mean R2* values derived from T2(*)-MRI, and PET metabolic parameters, including maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumour volume (MTV) and total lesional glycolysis (TLG) were measured for the primary tumour. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate correlations between ADCmean, R2*, SUVmax, MTV and TLG. A paired t-test was performed to assess the MRI changes and the slope of serial MRI changes during RT. RESULTS: Pre-treatment scans were performed in 28 patients and mid-treatment scans in 20 patients. No significant correlation was found between ADCmean and either R2* values or PET parameters. There were significant negative correlations of R2* values with pre-treatment PET parameters but not with mid-RT PET parameters: pre-SUVmax (p = 0.008), pre-MTV (p = 0.006) and pre-TLG (p = 0.008). A significant rise in ADCmean was found during the first half (p < 0.001) of RT but not in the second half (p = 0.215) of the treatment. There was an increase of the ADCmean values of 279.4 [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 210-348] in the first half of the treatment (Weeks 0-3). However, during the second-half period of treatment, the mean ADC value (Weeks 3-6) was 24.0 and the 95% CI (-40 to 88) included zero. This suggests that there was no significant change in ADC values during the second half of the treatment. CONCLUSION: A significant negative correlation was found between pre-treatment R2*-MRI and PET parameters. DWI appeared to demonstrate potentially predictable changes during RT. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Understanding the correlation and changes that occur with time between potential imaging biomarkers may help us establish the most appropriate biomarkers to consider in future research.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the serial changes and correlations between readout-segmented technique with navigated phase correction diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI), R2*-MRI and (18)F-FDG positron emission tomography (PET) CT performed before and during radiation therapy (RT) in patients with mucosal primary head and neck cancer. METHODS: The mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADCmean) from DWI (at b = 50 and 800 s mm(-2)), the mean R2* values derived from T2(*)-MRI, and PET metabolic parameters, including maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumour volume (MTV) and total lesional glycolysis (TLG) were measured for the primary tumour. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate correlations between ADCmean, R2*, SUVmax, MTV and TLG. A paired t-test was performed to assess the MRI changes and the slope of serial MRI changes during RT. RESULTS: Pre-treatment scans were performed in 28 patients and mid-treatment scans in 20 patients. No significant correlation was found between ADCmean and either R2* values or PET parameters. There were significant negative correlations of R2* values with pre-treatment PET parameters but not with mid-RT PET parameters: pre-SUVmax (p = 0.008), pre-MTV (p = 0.006) and pre-TLG (p = 0.008). A significant rise in ADCmean was found during the first half (p < 0.001) of RT but not in the second half (p = 0.215) of the treatment. There was an increase of the ADCmean values of 279.4 [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 210-348] in the first half of the treatment (Weeks 0-3). However, during the second-half period of treatment, the mean ADC value (Weeks 3-6) was 24.0 and the 95% CI (-40 to 88) included zero. This suggests that there was no significant change in ADC values during the second half of the treatment. CONCLUSION: A significant negative correlation was found between pre-treatment R2*-MRI and PET parameters. DWI appeared to demonstrate potentially predictable changes during RT. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Understanding the correlation and changes that occur with time between potential imaging biomarkers may help us establish the most appropriate biomarkers to consider in future research.
Authors: Kyoungjune Pak; Gi Jeong Cheon; Hyun-Yeol Nam; Seong-Jang Kim; Keon Wook Kang; June-Key Chung; E Edmund Kim; Dong Soo Lee Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2014-04-21 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Wolfgang Bogner; Katja Pinker-Domenig; Hubert Bickel; Marek Chmelik; Michael Weber; Thomas H Helbich; Siegfried Trattnig; Stephan Gruber Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Seung Hong Choi; Jin Chul Paeng; Chul-Ho Sohn; Jefferson R Pagsisihan; Young-Jae Kim; Kwang Gi Kim; Ji Yeon Jang; Tae Jin Yun; Ji-Hoon Kim; Moon Hee Han; Kee-Hyun Chang Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2011-06-16 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Julia Fruehwald-Pallamar; Christian Czerny; Marius E Mayerhoefer; Benjamin S Halpern; Christina Eder-Czembirek; Markus Brunner; Matthias Schuetz; Michael Weber; Laura Fruehwald; Andreas M Herneth Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-04-05 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Luiza A M Olteanu; Dieter Berwouts; Indira Madani; Werner De Gersem; Tom Vercauteren; Fréderic Duprez; Wilfried De Neve Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2014-04-17 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Dieter Berwouts; Luiza A M Olteanu; Fréderic Duprez; Tom Vercauteren; Werner De Gersem; Wilfried De Neve; Christophe Van de Wiele; Indira Madani Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2013-05-03 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Myo Min; Peter Lin; Mark T Lee; Ivan Ho Shon; Michael Lin; Dion Forstner; Victoria Bray; Andrew Chicco; Minh Thi Tieu; Allan Fowler Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-06-17 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Kee H Wong; Rafal Panek; Shreerang A Bhide; Christopher M Nutting; Kevin J Harrington; Katie L Newbold Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Peter Lin; Myo Min; Mark Lee; Lois Holloway; Dion Forstner; Victoria Bray; Allan Fowler Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: David Aramburu Núñez; Antonio Lopez Medina; Moisés Mera Iglesias; Francisco Salvador Gomez; Abhay Dave; Vaios Hatzoglou; Ramesh Paudyal; Alfonso Calzado; Joseph O Deasy; Amita Shukla-Dave; Victor M Muñoz Journal: World J Radiol Date: 2017-01-28
Authors: Christopher N Rumley; Mark T Lee; Lois Holloway; Robba Rai; Myo Min; Dion Forstner; Allan Fowler; Gary Liney Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2017-07-10 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Kee H Wong; Rafal Panek; Alex Dunlop; Dualta Mcquaid; Angela Riddell; Liam C Welsh; Iain Murray; Dow-Mu Koh; Martin O Leach; Shreerang A Bhide; Christopher M Nutting; Wim J Oyen; Kevin J Harrington; Kate L Newbold Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-11-21 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Nicole Wiedenmann; Hatice Bunea; Hans C Rischke; Andrei Bunea; Liette Majerus; Lars Bielak; Alexey Protopopov; Ute Ludwig; Martin Büchert; Christian Stoykow; Nils H Nicolay; Wolfgang A Weber; Michael Mix; Philipp T Meyer; Jürgen Hennig; Michael Bock; Anca L Grosu Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-08-29 Impact factor: 3.481