| Literature DB >> 30866854 |
Xing Yang1, Jinyu Zhu1, Yongming Dai2, Zhen Tian3, Gongxin Yang1, Huimin Shi4, Yingwei Wu5, Xiaofeng Tao1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI) is helpful for depicting hemorrhage, calcification, and increased vascularity in some neoplasms, which may reflect tumor grade. In this study, we aimed to apply SWI in patients with oral tongue squamous cell carcinomas (OTSCCs) and relate multi-parametric effect to tumor histological grade prediction.Entities:
Keywords: Intratumoral susceptibility signal intensities (ITSSs); MRI; Oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma (OTSCC); Susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI)
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30866854 PMCID: PMC6417004 DOI: 10.1186/s12880-019-0322-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Imaging ISSN: 1471-2342 Impact factor: 1.930
Cohort characteristics
| Patient | Gender | Age | WHO Grading | Pathological Grading | Tumor Volume (cm3) | Tumor Thickness (mm) | ITSSs (n) | ITSS Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | F | 66 | I | low | 18.7 | 35 | 12 | 3 |
| 2 | F | 66 | I | low | 1.3 | 12 | 0 | 0 |
| 3 | M | 70 | I | low | 50.1 | 55 | 4 | 1 |
| 4 | M | 55 | I | low | 17.8 | 32 | 3 | 1 |
| 5 | M | 52 | I | low | 27.4 | 36 | 7 | 2 |
| 6 | M | 20 | I | low | 3.9 | 12 | 8 | 2 |
| 7 | M | 50 | I | low | 35.2 | 34 | 3 | 1 |
| 8 | M | 62 | I-II | low | 1.8 | 24 | 2 | 1 |
| 9 | M | 66 | I-II | low | 8.6 | 24 | 2 | 1 |
| 10 | M | 57 | I-II | low | 41.4 | 44 | 8 | 2 |
| 11 | M | 49 | I-II | low | 1.6 | 18 | 0 | 0 |
| 12 | F | 53 | I-II | low | 4.7 | 18 | 3 | 1 |
| 13 | M | 51 | I-II | low | 1.6 | 12 | 2 | 1 |
| 14 | M | 40 | I-II | low | 1.9 | 12 | 2 | 1 |
| 15 | F | 80 | I-II | low | 0.5 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | M | 59 | I-II | low | 4.8 | 20 | 5 | 1 |
| 17 | M | 61 | I-II | low | 2.5 | 12 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | F | 69 | I-II | low | 0.4 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | M | 59 | I-II | low | 2.2 | 12 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | M | 47 | I-II | low | 4.4 | 22 | 2 | 1 |
| 21 | M | 53 | II | high | 23.3 | 38 | 9 | 2 |
| 22 | M | 51 | II | high | 5.6 | 16 | 5 | 1 |
| 23 | M | 56 | II | high | 4.5 | 18 | 3 | 1 |
| 24 | F | 76 | II | high | 16.1 | 36 | 12 | 3 |
| 25 | M | 61 | II | high | 3.1 | 18 | 8 | 2 |
| 26 | M | 56 | II | high | 3.7 | 18 | 9 | 2 |
| 27 | M | 49 | II | high | 4.8 | 20 | 13 | 3 |
| 28 | F | 54 | II | high | 4.9 | 18 | 6 | 2 |
| 29 | F | 55 | II-III | high | 11.1 | 12 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | M | 42 | II-III | high | 2.8 | 20 | 5 | 1 |
Note. ITSS score was divided into 0–3: Score 0 indicated absence of ITSS; Score 1 indicated less than 5 ITSSs; Score 2 indicated 6–10 ITSSs; and Score 3 indicated more than 10 ITSSs
Fig. 1A histological SCC on right oral tongue (a) Hyperintense signal of the tumor lesion was observed on T2WI at the edge of right oral tongue (arrowhead). b SWI showed multiple linear-shaped or dot-like ITSSs (arrowhead) within the lesion. c Histological findings showed multiple vessels in the corresponding site of the tumor
Comparison of single variables between low- and high-grade tumors
| Variable | Low-grade | High-grade | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ITSS score | 0.95 ± 0.83 | 1.70 ± 0.95 | 0.036 | −2.095 |
| ITSS scores, n(%) | 20(100%) | 10(100%) | ||
| 0 | 6(30%) | 1(10%) | ||
| 1 | 10(50%) | 3(30%) | ||
| 2 | 3(15%) | 4(40%) | ||
| 3 | 1(5%) | 2(20%) | ||
| Tumor thickness(mm) | 22.2 ± 13.4 | 21.4 ± 8.5 | 0.812 | |
| Ln [Tumor volume (cm3)] | 1.5 ± 1.4 | 1.8 ± 0.7 | 0.5 |
Fig. 2a-b A histological high-grade SCC on left oral tongue (a) Hyperintense lesion was shown on T2WI (b) At least 5 ITSSs was seen within the tumor (arrowhead) and its ITSS score was defined as 2. c-d A histological low-grade SCC on left oral tongue (c) Hyperintense lesion was shown on T2WI. d No apparent ITSS was seen within the tumor and therefore its ITSS score was defined as 0
Fig. 3Receiving operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed the capability of ITSSs in predicting oral tongue cancer histological grade, with an area under the curve of 0.79 (0.61,0.92)
Predictive efficiency of single or multiparametric models
| One variable | c-stastics | Multiple variables | c-stastics |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 0.42(0.21,0.64) | ITSSs + age | 0.79(0.60,0.97) |
| Volume | 0.60(0.41,0.77) | ITSSs + Volume | 0.84(0.66,1.00) |
| Thickness | 0.53(0.34,0.72) | ITSSs + thickness | 0.84(0.69,0.99) |
| ITSSs | 0.79(0.61,0.92) | ||
| ITSS score | 0.73(0.54,0.88) | ||
| ITSS ratio(%) | 0.70(0.51,0.85) |
Fig. 4Multi-parametric model using combination of ITSSs and tumor thickness could greatly improve the predictive capability, yielding higher predictive efficiency in comparison with single variable, an area under the curve of 0.84(0.69,0.99)
Fig. 5Box plots of multi-parametric model using ITSSs and tumor thickness between low-grade and high-grade groups. The discrimination slope was calculated as the difference of mean predictive scores between low-grade and high-grade groups. Solid dots indicated mean value
Fig. 6a-c Representative images showed a low-grade SCC on left oral tongue (a) A slightly hyperintense lesion was shown on T2WI. b Hyperintense lesion and dot-like ITSSs within the tumor (arrowhead) were seen on SWI. c Contrast-enhanced axial SWI showed the internal structure more clearly than non-contrast SWI images (arrowhead)