| Literature DB >> 30333055 |
Chuangen Guo1, Xiaoling Zhuge2, Qidong Wang1, Wenbo Xiao1, Zhonglan Wang3, Zhongqiu Wang3, Zhan Feng4, Xiao Chen5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Imaging findings for pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma (PNEC) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) often overlap. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the value of computed tomography (CT) imaging features and texture analysis to differentiate PNEC from PDAC.Entities:
Keywords: Computed tomography.; Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.; Pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma; Texture analysis.
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30333055 PMCID: PMC6192319 DOI: 10.1186/s40644-018-0170-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Imaging ISSN: 1470-7330 Impact factor: 3.909
Patient characteristics and CT imaging findings
| Characteristics | PDAC( | PNEC( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age(years) | 62.6 ± 9.7 (42–75) | 56.4 ± 11.6 (25–71) | < 0.05 |
| Gender | 0.31 | ||
| Male | 17 (60.7%) | 11 (78.6%) | |
| Female | 11 (39.3%) | 3 (21.4%) | |
| Size(cm) | 3.56 ± 1.45 | 5.10 ± 4.42 | 0.09 |
| Location | 0.18 | ||
| Head or neck | 19 (67.9%) | 6 (42.9%) | |
| Body or tail | 9 (22.1%) | 8 (57.1%) | |
| Margin | 0.04 | ||
| Well-defined | 7 (25.0%) | 8 (57.1%) | |
| Indistinct | 21 (75.0%) | 6 (42.9%) | |
| CT attenuation value(HU) | |||
| Un-enhanced phase | 33.8 ± 4.76 | 37.8 ± 5.86 | 0.23 |
| Arterial phase | 44.2 ± 8.56 | 64.6 ± 10.37 | < 0.01 |
| Portal phase | 52.3 ± 7.49 | 64.9 ± 11.06 | 0.01 |
| Parenchymal atrophy | 19 (67.9%) | 4 (28.6%) | 0.02 |
| Pancreatic duct dilatation | 16 (71.4%) | 7 (50.0%) | 0.19 |
| Positive lymph nodes or local invasion | 14 (50.0%) | 3 (21.4%) | 0.10 |
PDAC pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas; PNEC pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma
CT computed tomography
Fig. 1The computed tomography imaging findings in a 66-year-old woman with pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma (PNEC, white arrow) and a 62-year-old man with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC, black arrow). Unenhanced and contrast-enhanced CT images at the arterial phase and portal phase showed ill-defined, hypovascular mass
Fig. 2The contrast ratio in pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma (PNEC) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) at the arterialand portal phases. The contrast ratios were higher in PNEC than PDAC
Fig. 3The entropy and uniformity in pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma (PNEC) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) at the arterial (a) and portal (b) phases. PNEC showed lower entropy and higher uniformity than PDAC at the portal phase
Diagnostic performance of CT features and texture features for differentiating PNEC from PDAC
| Variables | AUC | Sensitivity | Specificity | Cutoff point | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT features | AER | 0.99 | 1.0 (0.77–1.0) | 0.93 (0.66–1.00) | 0.56 |
| PER | 0.98 | 0.93 (0.66–1.0) | 1.00 (0.77–1.00) | 0.63 | |
| Texture features at portal phase | F3 uniformity | 0.72 | 0.79 (0.54–0.94) | 0.65 (0.41–0.85) | 0.34 |
| F3 entropy | 0.71 | 0.74 (0.49–0.91) | 0.70 (0.46–0.88) | 1.89 |
f1-f3 denote sigma values of 0.5, 1.5 and 2.5, respectively. CI confidence interval; AER enhancement ratio at arterial phase; PER enhancement ratio at portal phase; AUC area under the curve
Fig. 4Receiver operating characteristic curves of the contrast ratio at the arterial phase (AER) and portal phase (PER) (A), and texture parameters (uniformity, uni; entropy, ent) (B) at portal phase for differentiating pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma (PNEC) from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Entropy and uniformity at high sigma values had acceptable AUCs (> 0.70)