Julian Kirchner1, Cornelius Deuschl2, Johannes Grueneisen2, Ken Herrmann3, Michael Forsting2, Philipp Heusch4, Gerald Antoch4, Lale Umutlu2. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Moorenstrasse 5, 40225, Dusseldorf, Germany. julian.kirchner@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 2. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45147, Essen, Germany. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45147, Essen, Germany. 4. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Moorenstrasse 5, 40225, Dusseldorf, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic potential of different reading protocols, entailing non-enhanced/contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted 18F-FDG PET/MR imaging for lesion detection and determination of the tumor stage in lymphoma patients. METHODS: A total of 101 18F-FDG PET/MRI datasets including a (1) transverse T2-w HASTE and 18F-FDG PET (PET/MRI1), (2) with an additional contrast enhanced VIBE (PET/MRI2), and (3) with additional diffusion-weighted imaging (PET/MRI3) were evaluated. Scans were performed for initial staging, restaging during treatment, or at the end of treatment and under surveillance with suspicion for tumor relapse. In all datasets lymphoma manifestations as well as tumor stage in analogy to the revised criteria of the Ann Arbor staging system were determined. Furthermore, potential changes in therapy compared to the reference standard were evaluated. Hitherto performed PET/CT and all available follow-up and prior examinations as well as histopathology served as reference standard. RESULTS: PET/MRI1 correctly identified 53/55 patients with active lymphoma and 190/205 lesions. Respective values were 55/55, 202/205 for PET/MRI2 and 55/55, 205/205 for PET/MRI3. PET/MRI1 determined correct tumor stage in 88 out of 101 examinations, and corresponding results for PET/MRI2 were 95 out of 101 and 96 out of 101 in PET/MRI3. Relating to the reference standard changes in treatment would occur in 11% based on PET/MRI1, in 6% based on PET/MRI2, and in 3% based on PET/MRI3. CONCLUSIONS: The additional application of contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging to 18F-FDG PET/MRI resulted in higher diagnostic competence, particularly for initial staging and correct classification of the disease extent with potential impact on patient and therapy management.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic potential of different reading protocols, entailing non-enhanced/contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted 18F-FDG PET/MR imaging for lesion detection and determination of the tumor stage in lymphomapatients. METHODS: A total of 101 18F-FDG PET/MRI datasets including a (1) transverse T2-w HASTE and 18F-FDG PET (PET/MRI1), (2) with an additional contrast enhanced VIBE (PET/MRI2), and (3) with additional diffusion-weighted imaging (PET/MRI3) were evaluated. Scans were performed for initial staging, restaging during treatment, or at the end of treatment and under surveillance with suspicion for tumor relapse. In all datasets lymphoma manifestations as well as tumor stage in analogy to the revised criteria of the Ann Arbor staging system were determined. Furthermore, potential changes in therapy compared to the reference standard were evaluated. Hitherto performed PET/CT and all available follow-up and prior examinations as well as histopathology served as reference standard. RESULTS: PET/MRI1 correctly identified 53/55 patients with active lymphoma and 190/205 lesions. Respective values were 55/55, 202/205 for PET/MRI2 and 55/55, 205/205 for PET/MRI3. PET/MRI1 determined correct tumor stage in 88 out of 101 examinations, and corresponding results for PET/MRI2 were 95 out of 101 and 96 out of 101 in PET/MRI3. Relating to the reference standard changes in treatment would occur in 11% based on PET/MRI1, in 6% based on PET/MRI2, and in 3% based on PET/MRI3. CONCLUSIONS: The additional application of contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging to 18F-FDG PET/MRI resulted in higher diagnostic competence, particularly for initial staging and correct classification of the disease extent with potential impact on patient and therapy management.
Entities:
Keywords:
Diffusion-weighted imaging; Lymphoma; PET/MRI; Revised Ann Arbor Classification
Authors: Bruce D Cheson; Richard I Fisher; Sally F Barrington; Franco Cavalli; Lawrence H Schwartz; Emanuele Zucca; T Andrew Lister Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-09-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Wendy Atkinson; Ciprian Catana; Jeremy S Abramson; Grae Arabasz; Shanaugh McDermott; Onofrio Catalano; Victorine Muse; Michael A Blake; Jeffrey Barnes; Martin Shelly; Ephraim Hochberg; Bruce R Rosen; Alexander R Guimaraes Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2016-07
Authors: Christian Philipp Reinert; Clemens Hinterleitner; Jan Fritz; Konstantin Nikolaou; Marius Horger Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-06-18 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Martijn V Verhagen; Leon J Menezes; Deena Neriman; Tom A Watson; Shonit Punwani; Stuart A Taylor; Ananth Shankar; Stephen Daw; Paul D Humphries Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-02-19 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: D L Bailey; B J Pichler; B Gückel; G Antoch; H Barthel; Z M Bhujwalla; S Biskup; S Biswal; M Bitzer; R Boellaard; R F Braren; C Brendle; K Brindle; A Chiti; C la Fougère; R Gillies; V Goh; M Goyen; M Hacker; L Heukamp; G M Knudsen; A M Krackhardt; I Law; J C Morris; K Nikolaou; J Nuyts; A A Ordonez; K Pantel; H H Quick; K Riklund; O Sabri; B Sattler; E G C Troost; M Zaiss; L Zender; Thomas Beyer Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Maike E Lindemann; Vanessa Stebner; Alexander Tschischka; Julian Kirchner; Lale Umutlu; Harald H Quick Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-10-30 Impact factor: 3.240