| Literature DB >> 32252829 |
Jose Angelo Udal Perucho1, Keith Wan Hang Chiu1, Esther Man Fung Wong2, Ka Yu Tse3, Mandy Man Yee Chu3, Lawrence Wing Chi Chan4, Herbert Pang5, Pek-Lan Khong1, Elaine Yuen Phin Lee6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has limited accuracy in detecting pelvic lymph node (PLN) metastasis. This study aimed to examine the use of intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) in classifying pelvic lymph node (PLN) involvement in cervical cancer patients.Entities:
Keywords: Cervical Cancer; Diffusion-weighted imaging; Intravoxel incoherent motion; Lymph node metastasis; Magnetic resonance imaging; Perfusion
Year: 2020 PMID: 32252829 PMCID: PMC7137185 DOI: 10.1186/s40644-020-00303-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Imaging ISSN: 1470-7330 Impact factor: 3.909
Summary of MRI scan parameters. CE: contrast-enhanced, DWI: diffusion-weighted imaging; FFE: fast field echo; TR/TE: repetition time/echo; TSE: turbo spin echo; SPAIR: Spectral Attenuation Inversion Recovery; SENSE: sensitivity encoding
| Sequences | T2W TSE | T2W SPAIR | T2W TSE | DWI | CE 3D T1W FFE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plane | Sagittal | Coronal | Axial | Axial | 3D |
| TR/TE (ms) | 4000/80 | 3500/80 | 2800/100 | 2000/54 | 3/1.4 |
| Turbo factor | 30 | 21 | 12 | NA | NA |
| SENSE factor | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Field of view (mm) | 240 × 240 | 230 × 230 | 402 × 300 | 406 × 300 | 370 × 203 |
| Matrix size | 480 × 298 | 352 × 300 | 787 × 600 | 168 × 124 | 248 × 134 |
| Slice thickness (mm) | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1.5 |
| Intersection gap (mm) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Bandwidth (Hz/pixel) | 230 | 186 | 169 | 15.3 | 724 |
| Number of excitations | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
Fig. 1A case of a 69-year-old patient International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staged IIA with a sub-centimetre pelvic lymph nodes on parametric maps of (a) axial fused 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) image and (b) axial T2-weighted (T2W) image. This patient was classified as metastatic by the IVIM models and correctly staged by the subspecialist but not the non-subspecialist.
Fig. 2A case of a 67-year-old patient International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staged IIIB with a sub-centimetre pelvic lymph node on parametric maps of (a) coronal fused 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) image and (b) axial T2-weighted image. This patient was classified as metastatic by the IVIM models and correctly staged by the subspecialist but not the non-subspecialist.
Fig. 3Representative example of the placement of region of interest in the parametric maps of (a) T2-weighted image, (b) apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), (c) pure diffusion coefficient (D), and (d) perfusion fraction (f) on a case of a 66-year old patient International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staged IIA2. This was repeated on subsequent slices to include the entire tumour volume.
Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) parameter values of the primary tumour between patients without nodal involvement, those with sub-centimetre involvement, and those with size-significant involvement. ADC: apparent diffusion coefficient (x 10− 3 mm2/s); D: pure diffusion coefficient (x 10− 3 mm2/s); f: perfusion fraction. PLN: pelvic lymph node
| No involvement | Sub-centimetre involvement | Size-significant involvement | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DTV (cm3) | 22.84 ± 22.84 | 54.04 ± 52.42 | 50.18 ± 34.63 | 0.013 |
| ADC (10−3 mm2/s) | 1.07 ± 0.15 | 0.98 ± 0.14 | 0.93 ± 0.11 | 0.015 |
| D (10− 3 mm2/s) | 0.91 ± 0.16 | 0.84 ± 0.12 | 0.80 ± 0.09 | 0.057 |
| 0.19 ± 0.04 | 0.15 ± 0.03 | 0.16 ± 0.04 | 0.006 |
Fig. 4Boxplots of the diffusion tumour volume (DTV), perfusion fraction (f), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and pure diffusion coefficient (D) measurements of the primary tumour separated by nodal involvement with pairwise group comparisons.
Pelvic lymph node involvement classification performances of the radiologists as well as the classification performances of the intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) classification models. The p-values of the relative classification performances of each model are given where the first IVIM classification model served as the reference. The first IVIM model used parameters dervied from the subspecialist’s tumours segmentations, and the second IVIM model used parameters dervied from the non-subspecialist’s tumour segementations. VOI: Volume of Interest
| Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subspecialist | 0.90 | 0.95 | 0.86 | 0.31 | |
| Non-subspecialist | 0.76 | 0.62 | 0.86 | 0.73 | |
| Subspecialist VOI | 0.80 | 0.71 | 0.86 | ref | |
| Non-subspecialist VOI | 0.82 | 0.80 | 0.82 | 0.86 | |
Patients with sub-centimetre metastatic pelvic lymph node (PLN) involvement and the nodal staging given by the radiologists as well as the PLN classification given by the intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) models. Correct staging or classification of PLN involvement despite size-insignificance are marked with the character ‘X’
| Code | Subspecialist | Non-subspecialist | IVIM Model (Subspecialist) | IVIM Model (Non-subspecialist) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | X | X | X | |
| 13 | X | X | X | |
| 17 | X | X | X | |
| 21 | X | X | X | |
| 23 | X | X | X | |
| 28 | X | X | X | |
| 30 | X | X | X | X |
| 32 | X | |||
| 38 | X | X | X | X |
| 44 | X | X | X |