Xiao-ping Yu1,2, Jing Hou1, Fei-ping Li1, Wang Xiang1, Qiang Lu1, Yin Hu3, Hui Wang3. 1. 1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Hunan Cancer Hospital and the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, People's Republic China. 2. 2 Department of Radiology, the third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, People's Republic China. 3. 3 Department of Diagnostic Radiotherapy, Hunan Cancer Hospital and the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, People's Republic China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the value of quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (QDCE-MRI) and diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) in differentiating nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) from lymphoma. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the data from 102 patients (82 with NPC and 20 with lymphoma) who underwent pre-treatment QDCE-MRI and DW-MRI on a 1.5-T MR unit. QDEC-MRI parameters [influx transfer constant (K(trans)), efflux rate constant (Kep), fractional volume of extravascular extracellular space (Ve) and fractional volume of plasma (fPV)] based on pharmacokinetic model and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) were compared between the two nasopharyngeal malignancies. RESULTS: The K(trans), Kep, Ve, fPV and ADC values (mean ± standard deviation) for NPC were 0.366 ± 0.155 min(-1), 1.353 ± 0.468 min(-1), 0.292 ± 0.117, 0.027 ± 0.024 and 0.981 ± 0.184 × 10(-3) mm(2) s(-1), respectively. The K(trans), Kep, Ve, fPV and ADC values (mean ± standard deviation) for lymphoma were 0.212 ± 0.059 min(-1), 1.073 ± 0.238 min(-1), 0.213 ± 0.104, 0.008 ± 0.007 and 0.760 ± 0.182 × 10(-3) mm(2) s(-1), respectively. Optimal cut-off values (area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity) for distinguishing the two tumours were as follows: K(trans) = 0.262 min(-1) (0.866, 80.49%, 85.00%), Kep = 1.401 min(-1) (0.681, 43.90%, 100.00%), Ve = 0.211 (0.784, 76.83%, 85.00%), fPV = 0.012 (0.779, 60.98%, 85.00%), ADC = 0.761 × 10(-3) mm(2) s(-1) (0.781, 93.90%, 55.00%). CONCLUSIONS: QDCE-MRI together with DW-MRI is useful for differentiation between NPC and lymphoma.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the value of quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (QDCE-MRI) and diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) in differentiating nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) from lymphoma. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the data from 102 patients (82 with NPC and 20 with lymphoma) who underwent pre-treatment QDCE-MRI and DW-MRI on a 1.5-T MR unit. QDEC-MRI parameters [influx transfer constant (K(trans)), efflux rate constant (Kep), fractional volume of extravascular extracellular space (Ve) and fractional volume of plasma (fPV)] based on pharmacokinetic model and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) were compared between the two nasopharyngeal malignancies. RESULTS: The K(trans), Kep, Ve, fPV and ADC values (mean ± standard deviation) for NPC were 0.366 ± 0.155 min(-1), 1.353 ± 0.468 min(-1), 0.292 ± 0.117, 0.027 ± 0.024 and 0.981 ± 0.184 × 10(-3) mm(2) s(-1), respectively. The K(trans), Kep, Ve, fPV and ADC values (mean ± standard deviation) for lymphoma were 0.212 ± 0.059 min(-1), 1.073 ± 0.238 min(-1), 0.213 ± 0.104, 0.008 ± 0.007 and 0.760 ± 0.182 × 10(-3) mm(2) s(-1), respectively. Optimal cut-off values (area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity) for distinguishing the two tumours were as follows: K(trans) = 0.262 min(-1) (0.866, 80.49%, 85.00%), Kep = 1.401 min(-1) (0.681, 43.90%, 100.00%), Ve = 0.211 (0.784, 76.83%, 85.00%), fPV = 0.012 (0.779, 60.98%, 85.00%), ADC = 0.761 × 10(-3) mm(2) s(-1) (0.781, 93.90%, 55.00%). CONCLUSIONS: QDCE-MRI together with DW-MRI is useful for differentiation between NPC and lymphoma.
Entities:
Keywords:
diffusion-weighted imaging; dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging; nasopharyngeal carcinoma; nasopharyngeal lymphoma; sensitivity and specificity
Authors: Eline K Vos; Geert J S Litjens; Thiele Kobus; Thomas Hambrock; Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Jelle O Barentsz; Henkjan J Huisman; Tom W J Scheenen Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-05-31 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: J Y Yu; D Zhang; X L Huang; J Ma; C Yang; X J Li; H Xiong; B Zhou; R K Liao; Z Y Tang Journal: J Med Syst Date: 2020-02-26 Impact factor: 4.460
Authors: Qi-Yong Ai; Ann D King; Janet S M Chan; Weitian Chen; K C Allen Chan; John K S Woo; Benny C Y Zee; Anthony T C Chan; Darren M C Poon; Brigette B Y Ma; Edwin P Hui; Anil T Ahuja; Alexander C Vlantis; Jing Yuan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-03-22 Impact factor: 5.315