Literature DB >> 27636124

Evaluation of Magnetic Resonance (MR) Biomarkers for Assessment of Response With Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors: Comparison of the Measurements of Neuroendocrine Tumor Liver Metastases (NETLM) With Various MR Sequences and at Multiple Phases of Contrast Administration.

Gustavo Felipe Luersen1, W Wei, Eric P Tamm, Priya R Bhosale, Janio Szklaruk.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Our aim was to compare the interobserver and intraobserver variability for the measurement of the size of liver metastases in patients with carcinoid tumors with various magnetic resonance (MR) series.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective institutional review board-approved study, 30 patients with liver metastases from a carcinoid primary had a complete MR examination of the abdomen at 1.5 T with gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA). The complete MR examination included T1 (in-phase [IP]/out-of-phase [OOP], T2, diffusion-weighted imaging, pre-Gd-EOB-DTPA and post-Gd-EOB-DTPA 3D gradient echo (4 phases plus 20-minute hepatobiliary phase [HBP] Gd]). Four readers reviewed each series independently. The measurement for each lesion was compared to HBP-Gd images. The sensitivity for detection of each lesion was compared to HBP-Gd. Variance component analysis was used to estimate variance due to patient, lesion within patient, and reader by sequence. Linear mixed model was used to compare lesion size between sequences.
RESULTS: The HBP-Gd had the smallest interreader variability. There was no significant difference between series with respect to interreader variability. Lesion sizes measured in diffusion-weighted imaging was significantly higher. T2-weighted imaging was the closest to HBP-Gd. Lesion sizes measured with the other sequences were significantly smaller. There was significant difference in sensitivity of lesion detection of some series when compared to HBP-Gd.
CONCLUSION: The HBP-Gd series had the smallest interreader variability and is the recommended series to measure lesion size for evaluation of response to treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27636124      PMCID: PMC5027958          DOI: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000425

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr        ISSN: 0363-8715            Impact factor:   1.826


  15 in total

1.  Preoperative detection of colorectal liver metastases in fatty liver: MDCT or MRI?

Authors:  Vanessa Kulemann; Wolfgang Schima; Dietmar Tamandl; Klaus Kaczirek; Thomas Gruenberger; Friedrich Wrba; Michael Weber; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2010-04-13       Impact factor: 3.528

2.  Hepatic uptake of the magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent Gd-EOB-DTPA: role of human organic anion transporters.

Authors:  Mirko Leonhardt; Markus Keiser; Stefan Oswald; Jens Kühn; Jia Jia; Markus Grube; Heyo K Kroemer; Werner Siegmund; Werner Weitschies
Journal:  Drug Metab Dispos       Date:  2010-04-20       Impact factor: 3.922

3.  MRI of carcinoid tumors: spectrum of appearances in the gastrointestinal tract and liver.

Authors:  T R Bader; R C Semelka; V C Chiu; D M Armao; J T Woosley
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Follow-up of known carcinoid liver metastases: is respiratory-gated t(2) fast spin-echo enough?

Authors:  Priya Bhosale; Jin Wei Kwek; Revathy Iyer; Wei Wei; Roland Bassett; Vikas Kundra
Journal:  Neuroendocrinology       Date:  2011-04-07       Impact factor: 4.914

5.  Error model for reduction of cardiac and respiratory motion effects in quantitative liver DW-MRI.

Authors:  Paul Murphy; Tanya Wolfson; Anthony Gamst; Claude Sirlin; Mark Bydder
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 4.668

6.  Expression of OATP1B3 determines uptake of Gd-EOB-DTPA in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Masato Narita; Etsuro Hatano; Shigeki Arizono; Aya Miyagawa-Hayashino; Hiroyoshi Isoda; Koji Kitamura; Kojiro Taura; Kentaro Yasuchika; Takashi Nitta; Iwao Ikai; Shinji Uemoto
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-04-29       Impact factor: 7.527

Review 7.  Assessment of liver tumor response to therapy: role of quantitative imaging.

Authors:  Fernanda D Gonzalez-Guindalini; Marcos P F Botelho; Carla B Harmath; Kumaresan Sandrasegaran; Frank H Miller; Riad Salem; Vahid Yaghmai
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 5.333

8.  Assessing liver function using dynamic Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI with a standard 5-phase imaging protocol.

Authors:  Kazuhiro Saito; Joseph Ledsam; Steven Sourbron; Jun Otaka; Yoichi Araki; Soichi Akata; Koichi Tokuuye
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2012-10-19       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 9.  Imaging of liver metastases: MRI.

Authors:  Saravanan Namasivayam; Diego R Martin; Sanjay Saini
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 3.909

10.  CT/MRI of neuroendocrine tumours.

Authors:  Rodney H Reznek
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2006-10-31       Impact factor: 3.909

View more
  6 in total

1.  Automatized Hepatic Tumor Volume Analysis of Neuroendocrine Liver Metastases by Gd-EOB MRI-A Deep-Learning Model to Support Multidisciplinary Cancer Conference Decision-Making.

Authors:  Uli Fehrenbach; Siyi Xin; Alexander Hartenstein; Timo Alexander Auer; Franziska Dräger; Konrad Froböse; Henning Jann; Martina Mogl; Holger Amthauer; Dominik Geisel; Timm Denecke; Bertram Wiedenmann; Tobias Penzkofer
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-31       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 2.  [Neuroendocrine tumors of the stomach, duodenum and pancreas : Value of (hybrid) radiological diagnostics].

Authors:  J Rübenthaler; C Auernhammer; I Harun; J Ricke; C C Cyran
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 3.  Neuroendocrine Neoplasms of the Small Bowel and Pancreas.

Authors:  Ashley Kieran Clift; Mark Kidd; Lisa Bodei; Christos Toumpanakis; Richard P Baum; Kjell Oberg; Irvin M Modlin; Andrea Frilling
Journal:  Neuroendocrinology       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 5.135

Review 4.  Are recist criteria adequate in assessing the response to therapy in metastatic NEN?

Authors:  Marie-Pierre Vullierme; Philippe Ruszniewski; Louis de Mestier
Journal:  Rev Endocr Metab Disord       Date:  2021-04-19       Impact factor: 9.306

5.  Radioembolization Versus Bland Embolization for Hepatic Metastases from Small Intestinal Neuroendocrine Tumors: Short-Term Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Anna-Karin Elf; Mats Andersson; Olof Henrikson; Oscar Jalnefjord; Maria Ljungberg; Johanna Svensson; Bo Wängberg; Viktor Johanson
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Optimal Phase of Dynamic Computed Tomography for Reliable Size Measurement of Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumors of the Liver: Comparison between Pre- and Post-Contrast Phases.

Authors:  Jimi Huh; Jisuk Park; Kyung Won Kim; Hyoung Jung Kim; Jong Seok Lee; Jong Hwa Lee; Yoong Ki Jeong; Atul B Shinagare; Nikhil H Ramaiya
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 3.500

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.