Literature DB >> 30523450

Accuracy of iodine density thresholds for the separation of vertebral bone metastases from healthy-appearing trabecular bone in spectral detector computed tomography.

Jan Borggrefe1, Victor-Frederic Neuhaus2, Markus Le Blanc2, Nils Grosse Hokamp2, Volker Maus2, Anastasios Mpotsaris2, Simon Lennartz2, Daniel Pinto Dos Santos2, David Maintz2, Nuran Abdullayev2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate quantitative iodine density mapping (IDM) with spectral detector computed tomography (SDCT) as a quantitative biomarker for separation of vertebral trabecular bone metastases (BM) from healthy-appearing trabecular bone (HTB).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: IRB-approved retrospective single-center-study of portal venous SDCT datasets acquired between June 2016 and March 2017. Inclusion of 43 consecutive cancer patients with BM and 40 without. Target lesions and non-affected control vertebrae were defined using follow-up imaging, MRI, and/or bone scintigraphy. ID and standard deviation were determined with ROI measures by two readers in (a) bone metastases, (b) HTB of BM patients and controls, and (c) ID of various vessels. Volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) of the lumbar spine and age were recorded. Multivariate ROC analyses und Wilcoxon test were used to determine thresholds for separation of BM and HTB. p < 0.05 was considered significant.
RESULTS: ID measurements of 40 target lesions and 83 reference measurements of HTB were acquired. Age (p < 0.0001) and vBMD (p < 0.05) affected ID measurements independently in multivariate models. There were significant differences of ID between metastases (n = 43) and HTB ID (n = 124; mean 5.5 ± 0.9 vs. 3.5 ± 0.9; p < 0.0001), however, with considerable overlap. In univariate analysis, increased ID discriminated bone lesions (AUC 0.90) with a maximum combined specificity/sensitivity of 77.5%/90.7% when applying a threshold of 4.5 mg/ml. Multivariate regression models improved significantly when considering vBMD, the noise of ID, and vertebral venous ID (AUC 0.98).
CONCLUSION: IDM of SDCT yielded a statistical separation of vertebral bone lesions and HTB. Adjustment for confounders such as age and lumbar vBMD as well as for vertebral venous ID and lesion heterogeneity improved discrimination of trabecular lesions. KEY POINTS: • SDCT iodine density mapping provides the possibility for quantitative analysis of iodine uptake in tissue, which allows to differentiate bone lesions from healthy bone marrow. • Age and vBMD have a significant impact on iodine density measurements. • Iodine density measured in SDCT yielded highest sensitivity and specificity for the statistical differentiation of vertebral trabecular metastases and healthy trabecular bone using an iodine density threshold of 4.5 mg/ml (most performant)-5.0 mg/ml (optimized for specificity).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bone; Diagnosis; Iodine; Neoplasm metastasis; Tomography

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30523450     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-018-5843-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  30 in total

Review 1.  Metastasis to bone: causes, consequences and therapeutic opportunities.

Authors:  Gregory R Mundy
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 60.716

Review 2.  Mechanisms of bone metastasis.

Authors:  G David Roodman
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-04-15       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  What is the evidence that tumors are angiogenesis dependent?

Authors:  J Folkman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1990-01-03       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 4.  Radiological imaging for the diagnosis of bone metastases.

Authors:  L D Rybak; D I Rosenthal
Journal:  Q J Nucl Med       Date:  2001-03

Review 5.  Metastatic disease of the spine.

Authors:  Andrew P White; Brian K Kwon; Dieter M Lindskog; Gary E Friedlaender; Jonathan N Grauer
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.020

Review 6.  Microenvironmental regulation of metastasis.

Authors:  Johanna A Joyce; Jeffrey W Pollard
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2008-03-12       Impact factor: 60.716

7.  New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

Authors:  E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 8.  CT imaging of angiogenesis.

Authors:  T-Y Lee; T G Purdie; E Stewart
Journal:  Q J Nucl Med       Date:  2003-09

Review 9.  Mechanisms of tumor metastasis to the bone: challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  A Hari Reddi; David Roodman; Colette Freeman; Suresh Mohla
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 6.741

Review 10.  Spine metastasis imaging: review of the literature.

Authors:  R Guillevin; J-N Vallee; F Lafitte; C Menuel; N-M Duverneuil; J Chiras
Journal:  J Neuroradiol       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.447

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Utility of dual energy computed tomography in the evaluation of infiltrative skeletal lesions and metastasis: a literature review.

Authors:  Martin Toby Tan; Thomas Bernard Lloyd
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 2.128

2.  Phantomless assessment of volumetric bone mineral density using virtual non-contrast images from spectral detector computed tomography.

Authors:  David Zopfs; Simon Lennartz; Charlotte Zaeske; Martin Merkt; Kai Roman Laukamp; Robert Peter Reimer; David Maintz; Jan Borggrefe; Nils Grosse Hokamp
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2020-03-04       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Image quality evaluation of dual-layer spectral CT in comparison to single-layer CT in a reduced-dose setting.

Authors:  Thuy Duong Do; Stephan Rheinheimer; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Wolfram Stiller; Tim Weber; Stephan Skornitzke
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2020-05-11       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Dual-Energy CT, Virtual Non-Calcium Bone Marrow Imaging of the Spine: An AI-Assisted, Volumetric Evaluation of a Reference Cohort with 500 CT Scans.

Authors:  Philipp Fervers; Florian Fervers; Mathilda Weisthoff; Miriam Rinneburger; David Zopfs; Robert Peter Reimer; Gregor Pahn; Jonathan Kottlors; David Maintz; Simon Lennartz; Thorsten Persigehl; Nils Große Hokamp
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-09
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.