L D Patel1, K Bridgham1, J Ciriello1, R Almardawi1, J Leon1, J Hostetter1, S Yazbek1, P Raghavan2. 1. From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine Ringgold Standard Institution, Baltimore, Maryland. 2. From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine Ringgold Standard Institution, Baltimore, Maryland praghavan@umm.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: PET/MR imaging is a relatively new hybrid technology that holds great promise for the evaluation of head and neck cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of simultaneous PET/MR imaging versus MR imaging in the evaluation of posttreatment head and neck malignancies, as determined by its ability to predict locoregional recurrence or progression after imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The electronic medical records of patients who had posttreatment PET/MR imaging studies were reviewed, and after applying the exclusion criteria, we retrospectively included 46 studies. PET/MR imaging studies were independently reviewed by 2 neuroradiologists, who recorded scores based on the Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System (using CT/PET-CT criteria) for the diagnostic MR imaging sequences alone and the combined PET/MR imaging. Treatment failure was determined with either biopsy pathology or initiation of new treatment. Statistical analyses including univariate association, interobserver agreement, and receiver operating characteristic analysis were performed. RESULTS: There was substantial interreader agreement among PET/MR imaging scores (κ = 0.634; 95% CI, 0.605-0.663). PET/MR imaging scores showed a strong association with treatment failure by univariate association analysis, with P < .001 for the primary site, neck lymph nodes, and combined sites. Receiver operating characteristic curves of PET/MR imaging scores versus treatment failure indicated statistically significant diagnostic accuracy (area under curve range, 0.864-0.987; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous PET/MR imaging has excellent discriminatory performance for treatment outcomes of head and neck malignancy when the Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System is applied. PET/MR imaging could play an important role in surveillance imaging for head and neck cancer.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: PET/MR imaging is a relatively new hybrid technology that holds great promise for the evaluation of head and neck cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of simultaneous PET/MR imaging versus MR imaging in the evaluation of posttreatment head and neck malignancies, as determined by its ability to predict locoregional recurrence or progression after imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The electronic medical records of patients who had posttreatment PET/MR imaging studies were reviewed, and after applying the exclusion criteria, we retrospectively included 46 studies. PET/MR imaging studies were independently reviewed by 2 neuroradiologists, who recorded scores based on the Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System (using CT/PET-CT criteria) for the diagnostic MR imaging sequences alone and the combined PET/MR imaging. Treatment failure was determined with either biopsy pathology or initiation of new treatment. Statistical analyses including univariate association, interobserver agreement, and receiver operating characteristic analysis were performed. RESULTS: There was substantial interreader agreement among PET/MR imaging scores (κ = 0.634; 95% CI, 0.605-0.663). PET/MR imaging scores showed a strong association with treatment failure by univariate association analysis, with P < .001 for the primary site, neck lymph nodes, and combined sites. Receiver operating characteristic curves of PET/MR imaging scores versus treatment failure indicated statistically significant diagnostic accuracy (area under curve range, 0.864-0.987; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous PET/MR imaging has excellent discriminatory performance for treatment outcomes of head and neck malignancy when the Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System is applied. PET/MR imaging could play an important role in surveillance imaging for head and neck cancer.
Authors: Ashley H Aiken; Tanya J Rath; Yoshimi Anzai; Barton F Branstetter; Jenny K Hoang; Richard H Wiggins; Amy F Juliano; Christine Glastonbury; C Douglas Phillips; Richard Brown; Patricia A Hudgins Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2018-07-06 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: P Wangaryattawanich; B F Branstetter; J D Ly; U Duvvuri; D E Heron; T J Rath Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-05-28 Impact factor: 3.825
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
Authors: P Wangaryattawanich; B F Branstetter; M Hughes; D A Clump; D E Heron; T J Rath Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-08-30 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Usman Bashir; Andrew Mallia; James Stirling; John Joemon; Jane MacKewn; Geoff Charles-Edwards; Vicky Goh; Gary J Cook Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2015-07-21