Literature DB >> 27845245

MR elastography of hepatocellular carcinoma: Correlation of tumor stiffness with histopathology features-Preliminary findings.

Scott M Thompson1, Jin Wang1, Vishal S Chandan2, Kevin J Glaser1, Lewis R Roberts3, Richard L Ehman1, Sudhakar K Venkatesh4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine if tumor stiffness by MR Elastography (MRE) is associated with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) pathologic features.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective review was undertaken of all patients with pathologically confirmed HCC who underwent MRE prior to loco-regional therapy, surgical resection or transplant between 1/1/2007 to 12/31/2015. An independent observer measured tumor stiffness (kilopascals, kPa) by drawing regions of interest (ROI) covering the HCC and in the case of HCCs with non-enhancing/necrotic components, only the solid portion was included in the ROI. HCC tumor grade (WHO criteria), vascular invasion and tumor encapsulation were assessed from retrievable pathology specimens by an expert hepatobiliary pathologist. Tumor stiffness was compared by tumor grade, size, presence of capsule and vascular invasion using Student's t-test (or Exact Mann-Whitney test).
RESULTS: 21 patients were identified who had pathologically confirmed HCCs and tumor MRE data. 17 patients (81.0%) had underlying chronic liver disease. The mean±SD tumor size (cm) was 5.3±3.9cm. The mean±SD tumor stiffness was 5.9±1.4kPa. Tumors were graded as well differentiated (N=2), moderately differentiated (N=11) and poorly differentiated (N=8). There was a trend toward increased tumor stiffness in well/moderately differentiated HCCs (6.5±1.2kPa; N=13) compared to poorly differentiated HCCs (4.9±1.2kPa; N=8) (p<0.01). There was no significant correlation between tumor stiffness and liver stiffness or tumor size. There was no significant difference in tumor stiffness by presence or etiology of chronic liver disease, vascular invasion or tumor encapsulation.
CONCLUSION: Preliminary data suggest that tumor stiffness by MRE may be able to differentiate HCC tumor grade. Copyright Â
© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  HCC; Hepatocellular carcinoma; MR elastography; MRE; Tumor grade

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27845245      PMCID: PMC5587120          DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2016.11.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 0730-725X            Impact factor:   2.546


  27 in total

1.  EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors: 
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 2.  Liver masses: a clinical, radiologic, and pathologic perspective.

Authors:  Sudhakar K Venkatesh; Vishal Chandan; Lewis R Roberts
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 11.382

3.  Repeatability of magnetic resonance elastography for quantification of hepatic stiffness.

Authors:  Catherine D G Hines; Thorsten A Bley; Mary J Lindstrom; Scott B Reeder
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Impact of histological grade of hepatocellular carcinoma on the outcome of liver transplantation.

Authors:  S Tamura; T Kato; M Berho; E P Misiakos; C O'Brien; K R Reddy; J R Nery; G W Burke; E R Schiff; J Miller; A G Tzakis
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2001-01

5.  Preoperative assessment of hepatocellular carcinoma tumor grade using needle biopsy: implications for transplant eligibility.

Authors:  Timothy M Pawlik; Ana L Gleisner; Robert A Anders; Lia Assumpcao; Warren Maley; Michael A Choti
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Vascular invasion and histopathologic grading determine outcome after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis.

Authors:  S Jonas; W O Bechstein; T Steinmüller; M Herrmann; C Radke; T Berg; U Settmacher; P Neuhaus
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 17.425

7.  MR elastography of liver tumors: preliminary results.

Authors:  Sudhakar K Venkatesh; Meng Yin; James F Glockner; Naoki Takahashi; Philip A Araoz; Jayant A Talwalkar; Richard L Ehman
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012.

Authors:  Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2014-10-09       Impact factor: 7.396

9.  Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update.

Authors:  Jordi Bruix; Morris Sherman
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 17.425

10.  A computed tomography radiogenomic biomarker predicts microvascular invasion and clinical outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Sudeep Banerjee; David S Wang; Hyun J Kim; Claude B Sirlin; Michael G Chan; Ronald L Korn; Aaron M Rutman; Surachate Siripongsakun; David Lu; Galym Imanbayev; Michael D Kuo
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 17.425

View more
  17 in total

Review 1.  Magnetic resonance elastography: basic principles, technique, and clinical applications in the liver.

Authors:  Habip Eser Akkaya; Ayşe Erden; Diğdem Kuru Öz; Sena Ünal; İlhan Erden
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.630

Review 2.  Quantitative Elastography Methods in Liver Disease: Current Evidence and Future Directions.

Authors:  Paul Kennedy; Mathilde Wagner; Laurent Castéra; Cheng William Hong; Curtis L Johnson; Claude B Sirlin; Bachir Taouli
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Multifrequency magnetic resonance elastography-based tomoelastography of the parotid glands-feasibility and reference values.

Authors:  Fabian Henry Jürgen Elsholtz; Rolf Reiter; Stephan Rodrigo Marticorena Garcia; Jürgen Braun; Ingolf Sack; Bernd Hamm; Lars-Arne Schaafs
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 2.419

4.  Response comparison of PLC and SLC with magnetic resonance elastography after TACE.

Authors:  Y Haas; M P Dosch; T J Vogl
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-05-18       Impact factor: 4.996

Review 5.  Updates on Imaging of Liver Tumors.

Authors:  Arya Haj-Mirzaian; Ana Kadivar; Ihab R Kamel; Atif Zaheer
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2020-04-16       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 6.  Magnetic Resonance Elastography of Liver: Current Update.

Authors:  Safa Hoodeshenas; Meng Yin; Sudhakar Kundapur Venkatesh
Journal:  Top Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-10

Review 7.  New and Emerging Applications of Magnetic Resonance Elastography of Other Abdominal Organs.

Authors:  Jin Wang; Ying Deng; Danielle Jondal; David M Woodrum; Yu Shi; Meng Yin; Sudhakar K Venkatesh
Journal:  Top Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-10

Review 8.  Practical and clinical applications of pancreatic magnetic resonance elastography: a systematic review.

Authors:  Emily Steinkohl; Davide Bertoli; Tine Maria Hansen; Søren Schou Olesen; Asbjørn Mohr Drewes; Jens Brøndum Frøkjær
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-06-02

9.  Magnetic resonance elastography can predict development of hepatocellular carcinoma with longitudinally acquired two-point data.

Authors:  Shintaro Ichikawa; Utaroh Motosugi; Nobuyuki Enomoto; Hiroshi Onishi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 10.  Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging for focal liver lesions: bridging the gap between research and clinical practice.

Authors:  Roberto Cannella; Riccardo Sartoris; Jules Grégory; Lorenzo Garzelli; Valérie Vilgrain; Maxime Ronot; Marco Dioguardi Burgio
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 3.629

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.