Y Ota1, S Naganawa2, R Kurokawa3, J R Bapuraj2, A Capizzano2, J Kim2, T Moritani2, A Srinivasan2. 1. From the Division of Neuroradiology (Y.O., S.N., J.R.B., A.C., J.K., T.M., A.S.), Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan yoshiako@med.umich.edu. 2. From the Division of Neuroradiology (Y.O., S.N., J.R.B., A.C., J.K., T.M., A.S.), Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 3. Department of Radiology (R.K.), Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Head and neck paragangliomas have been reported to be associated with mutations of the succinate dehydrogenase enzyme family. The aim of this study was to assess whether radiologic features could differentiate between paragangliomas in the head and neck positive and negative for the succinate dehydrogenase mutation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-center retrospective review from January 2015 to January 2020 included 40 patients with 48 paragangliomas (30 tumors positive for succinate dehydrogenase mutation in 23 patients and 18 tumors negative for the succinate dehydrogenase mutation in 17 patients). ADC values and tumor characteristics on CT and MR imaging were evaluated by 2 radiologists. Differences between the 2 cohorts in the diagnostic performance of ADC and normalized ADC (ratio to ADC in the medulla oblongata) values were evaluated using the independent samples t test. P < .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: ADCmean (1.07 [SD, 0.25]/1.04 [SD, 0.12] versus 1.31 [SD, 0.16]/1.30 [SD, 0.20]× 10-3 mm2/s by radiologists 1 and 2; P < .001), ADCmaximum (1.49 [SD, 0.27]/1.49 [SD, 0.20] versus 2.01 [SD, 0.16]/1.87 [SD, 0.20] × 10-3 mm2/s; P < .001), normalized ADCmean (1.40 [SD, 0.33]/1.37 [SD, 0.16] versus 1.73 [SD, 0.22]/1.74 [SD, 0.27]; P < .001), and normalized ADCmaximum (1.95 [SD, 0.37]/1.97 [SD, 0.27] versus 2.64 [SD, 0.22]/2.48 [SD, 0.28]; P < .001) were significantly lower in succinate dehydrogenase mutation-positive than mutation-negative tumors. ADCminimum, normalized ADCminimum, and tumor characteristics were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: ADC is a promising imaging biomarker that can help differentiate succinate dehydrogenase mutation-positive from mutation-negative paragangliomas in the head and neck.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Head and neck paragangliomas have been reported to be associated with mutations of the succinate dehydrogenase enzyme family. The aim of this study was to assess whether radiologic features could differentiate between paragangliomas in the head and neck positive and negative for the succinate dehydrogenase mutation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-center retrospective review from January 2015 to January 2020 included 40 patients with 48 paragangliomas (30 tumors positive for succinate dehydrogenase mutation in 23 patients and 18 tumors negative for the succinate dehydrogenase mutation in 17 patients). ADC values and tumor characteristics on CT and MR imaging were evaluated by 2 radiologists. Differences between the 2 cohorts in the diagnostic performance of ADC and normalized ADC (ratio to ADC in the medulla oblongata) values were evaluated using the independent samples t test. P < .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: ADCmean (1.07 [SD, 0.25]/1.04 [SD, 0.12] versus 1.31 [SD, 0.16]/1.30 [SD, 0.20]× 10-3 mm2/s by radiologists 1 and 2; P < .001), ADCmaximum (1.49 [SD, 0.27]/1.49 [SD, 0.20] versus 2.01 [SD, 0.16]/1.87 [SD, 0.20] × 10-3 mm2/s; P < .001), normalized ADCmean (1.40 [SD, 0.33]/1.37 [SD, 0.16] versus 1.73 [SD, 0.22]/1.74 [SD, 0.27]; P < .001), and normalized ADCmaximum (1.95 [SD, 0.37]/1.97 [SD, 0.27] versus 2.64 [SD, 0.22]/2.48 [SD, 0.28]; P < .001) were significantly lower in succinate dehydrogenase mutation-positive than mutation-negative tumors. ADCminimum, normalized ADCminimum, and tumor characteristics were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: ADC is a promising imaging biomarker that can help differentiate succinate dehydrogenase mutation-positive from mutation-negative paragangliomas in the head and neck.
Authors: Akio Hiwatashi; Toshibumi Kinoshita; Toshio Moritani; Henry Z Wang; David A Shrier; Yuji Numaguchi; Sven E Ekholm; Per-Lennart Westesson Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Shivani Ahlawat; Paras Khandheria; Filippo Del Grande; John Morelli; Ty K Subhawong; Shadpour Demehri; Laura M Fayad Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Y Ota; E Liao; A A Capizzano; A Baba; R Kurokawa; M Kurokawa; A Srinivasan Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2022-08-11 Impact factor: 4.966
Authors: Y Ota; E Liao; A A Capizzano; R Kurokawa; J R Bapuraj; F Syed; A Baba; T Moritani; A Srinivasan Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2021-08-26 Impact factor: 4.966