Jan B Hinrichs1, Hoen-Oh Shin2, Daniel Kaercher2, Davut Hasdemir2, Tim Murray3, Till Kaireit2, Carolin Lutat2, Arndt Vogel4, Bernhard C Meyer2, Frank K Wacker2, Thomas Rodt2. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. hinrichs.jan@mh-hannover.de. 2. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. 3. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. 4. Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endocrinology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility and role of parametric response mapping (PRM) for quantitative assessment of regional contrast-enhancement patterns in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Biphasic CT of 19 patients receiving repetitive conventional transarterial chemoembolisation (cTACE) for intermediate stage HCC were retrospectively analysed at baseline and follow-up at 3, 6, and 9 months. Voxel-based registration of arterial and porto-venous phases, with segmentation of the largest target lesion was performed. Frequency distribution plots of density-pairs of segmented voxels were generated. To differentiate necrotic, hypervascular and non-hypervascular tumour, and lipiodol/calcification, thresholds of 30, 100, and 300 HU were applied. Changes in density frequency plots over time were analysed and compared to response and assessment criteria (WHO, RECIST, EASL, mRECIST) and survival. RESULTS: PRM was feasible in all cases. Tumour volumes and hypervascular/non-hypervascular volume ratio showed significant longitudinal decrease (p < 0.05). Hypervascular volume at baseline was inversely correlated to survival (R = -0.57, p = 0.005). The only predictive parameter following cTACE to show significant survival difference was the change of the viable/non-viable ratio (p = 0.044), whereas common response assessment criteria showed no significant difference in survival. CONCLUSIONS: PRM allows a quantitative and more precise assessment of regional tumour vascularisation patterns and may be helpful for TACE treatment planning and response assessment. KEY POINTS: • PRM allows more precise assessment of tumour vascularisation compared to conventional evaluation • PRM is beneficial for cTACE treatment planning and response assessment • PRM allows a quantitative assessment of regional contrast enhancement patterns.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility and role of parametric response mapping (PRM) for quantitative assessment of regional contrast-enhancement patterns in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Biphasic CT of 19 patients receiving repetitive conventional transarterial chemoembolisation (cTACE) for intermediate stage HCC were retrospectively analysed at baseline and follow-up at 3, 6, and 9 months. Voxel-based registration of arterial and porto-venous phases, with segmentation of the largest target lesion was performed. Frequency distribution plots of density-pairs of segmented voxels were generated. To differentiate necrotic, hypervascular and non-hypervascular tumour, and lipiodol/calcification, thresholds of 30, 100, and 300 HU were applied. Changes in density frequency plots over time were analysed and compared to response and assessment criteria (WHO, RECIST, EASL, mRECIST) and survival. RESULTS: PRM was feasible in all cases. Tumour volumes and hypervascular/non-hypervascular volume ratio showed significant longitudinal decrease (p < 0.05). Hypervascular volume at baseline was inversely correlated to survival (R = -0.57, p = 0.005). The only predictive parameter following cTACE to show significant survival difference was the change of the viable/non-viable ratio (p = 0.044), whereas common response assessment criteria showed no significant difference in survival. CONCLUSIONS: PRM allows a quantitative and more precise assessment of regional tumour vascularisation patterns and may be helpful for TACE treatment planning and response assessment. KEY POINTS: • PRM allows more precise assessment of tumour vascularisation compared to conventional evaluation • PRM is beneficial for cTACE treatment planning and response assessment • PRM allows a quantitative assessment of regional contrast enhancement patterns.
Authors: Jordi Bruix; Jean-Luc Raoul; Morris Sherman; Vincenzo Mazzaferro; Luigi Bolondi; Antonio Craxi; Peter R Galle; Armando Santoro; Michel Beaugrand; Angelo Sangiovanni; Camillo Porta; Guido Gerken; Jorge A Marrero; Andrea Nadel; Michael Shan; Marius Moscovici; Dimitris Voliotis; Josep M Llovet Journal: J Hepatol Date: 2012-06-19 Impact factor: 25.083
Authors: Josep M Llovet; Sergio Ricci; Vincenzo Mazzaferro; Philip Hilgard; Edward Gane; Jean-Frédéric Blanc; Andre Cosme de Oliveira; Armando Santoro; Jean-Luc Raoul; Alejandro Forner; Myron Schwartz; Camillo Porta; Stefan Zeuzem; Luigi Bolondi; Tim F Greten; Peter R Galle; Jean-François Seitz; Ivan Borbath; Dieter Häussinger; Tom Giannaris; Minghua Shan; Marius Moscovici; Dimitris Voliotis; Jordi Bruix Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-07-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Shimul A Shah; Sean P Cleary; Alice C Wei; Ilun Yang; Bryce R Taylor; Alan W Hemming; Bernard Langer; David R Grant; Paul D Greig; Steven Gallinger Journal: Surgery Date: 2006-11-01 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Wolfgang Schima; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah; Amir Kurtaran; Martin Schindl; Thomas Gruenberger Journal: Cancer Imaging Date: 2007-10-01 Impact factor: 3.909