scholarly journals Early detection treatment response for head and neck carcinomas using intravoxel incoherent motion-magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 20190507
Author(s):  
Qingxu Song ◽  
Fang Li ◽  
Xin Chen ◽  
Jianbo Wang ◽  
Hong Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Treatment Response ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intravoxel Incoherent Motion ◽  
Perfusion Fraction ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Pre Treatment

Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of intravoxel incoherent motion-MRI (IVIM-MRI) for predicting the treatment response in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC) patients. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify original articles on diagnostic performance of IVIM in predicting treatment response in HNSCC patients receiving chemoradiotherapy. The IVIM parameters studied were diffusion coefficient (D), pseudodiffusion coefficient (D*), perfusion fraction (f), and apparent diffusion coefficient. Summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy were obtained by using a random-effects model. Of 65 studies screened, 8 studies with 347 patients were finally included. Results: The pooled sensitivities and specificities were 76% [95% confidence interval (CI) 69–82%] and 81% (95% CI 70–89%) for pre-treatment D, and 70% (95% CI 58–80%) and 82% (95% CI 66–92%) for △D, respectively. In addition, the sensitivities and specificities ranged from 41.7 to 94% and 67 to 100% for pre-treatment f, and from 55.7 to 76.5% and 72.2 to 93.3% for pre-treatment apparent diffusion coefficient, respectively. Conclusions: The diffusion-related coefficients pre-treatment D and △D demonstrated good accuracy in predicting early treatment response in HNSCC patients. However, because of the variability in reference test and other limitations of included literature, further investigation is needed before implementing any IVIM strategy into clinical practice.

scholarly journals Pretreatment apparent diffusion coefficient cannot predict histopathological features and response to neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy in rectal cancer. A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexey Surov ◽  
Maciej Pech ◽  
Maciej Powerski ◽  
Katja Woidacki ◽  
Andreas Wienke
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Treatment Response ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neoadjuvant Radiochemotherapy ◽  
Ki 67 ◽  
Kras Status ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Aim: Our purpose was to perform a systemic literature review and meta-analysis regarding use of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for prediction of histopathological features in rectal cancer (RC) and to proof if ADC can predict treatment response to neoadjivant radiochemotherapy in RC. Methods: MEDLINE library, Cochrane and SCOPUS database were screened for associations between ADC and histopathology and/or treatment response in RC up to June 2020. Authors, year of publication, study design, number of patients, mean value and standard deviation of ADC were acquired. The methodological quality of the collected studies was checked according to the QUADAS 2 instrument. The meta-analysis was undertaken by using RevMan 5.3 software. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models with inverse-variance weights were used to account the heterogeneity between the studies. Mean ADC values including 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Results: Overall, 37 items (2015 patients) were included. ADC values of tumors with different T and N stages and grades overlapped strongly. ADC cannot distinguish RC with high and low CEA level. Regarding KRAS status, ADC cannot discriminate mutated and wild type RC. ADC did not correlate significantly with expression of VEGF and HIF 1a. ADC correlates with Ki 67, calculated correlation coefficient: -0.52. The ADC values in responders and non-responders overlapped significantly. Conclusion: ADC correlates moderately with expression of Ki 67 in RC. ADC cannot discriminate tumor stages, grades and KRAS status in RC. ADC cannot predict therapy response to neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy in RC.

scholarly journals Apparent diffusion coefficient cannot discriminate metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes in rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexey Surov ◽  
Hans-Jonas Meyer ◽  
Maciej Pech ◽  
Maciej Powerski ◽  
Jasan Omari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Lymph Nodes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Metastatic Lymph Nodes ◽  
Metastatic Lymph ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Abstract Background Our aim was to provide data regarding use of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for distinguishing metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes (LN) in rectal cancer. Methods MEDLINE library, EMBASE, and SCOPUS database were screened for associations between DWI and metastatic and non-metastatic LN in rectal cancer up to February 2021. Overall, 9 studies were included into the analysis. Number, mean value, and standard deviation of DWI parameters including apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of metastatic and non-metastatic LN were extracted from the literature. The methodological quality of the studies was investigated according to the QUADAS-2 assessment. The meta-analysis was undertaken by using RevMan 5.3 software. DerSimonian, and Laird random-effects models with inverse-variance weights were used to account the heterogeneity between the studies. Mean DWI values including 95% confidence intervals were calculated for metastatic and non-metastatic LN. Results ADC values were reported for 1376 LN, 623 (45.3%) metastatic LN, and 754 (54.7%) non-metastatic LN. The calculated mean ADC value (× 10−3 mm2/s) of metastatic LN was 1.05, 95%CI (0.94, 1.15). The calculated mean ADC value of the non-metastatic LN was 1.17, 95%CI (1.01, 1.33). The calculated sensitivity and specificity were 0.81, 95%CI (0.74, 0.89) and 0.67, 95%CI (0.54, 0.79). Conclusion No reliable ADC threshold can be recommended for distinguishing of metastatic and non-metastatic LN in rectal cancer.

scholarly journals The role of quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging in characterization of hypovascular liver lesions: A prospective comparison of intravoxel incoherent motion derived parameters and apparent diffusion coefficient

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0247301
Author(s):  
Jelena Djokić Kovač ◽  
Marko Daković ◽  
Aleksandra Janković ◽  
Milica Mitrović ◽  
Vladimir Dugalić ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Liver Metastases ◽  
Diffusion Weighted Imaging ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Intravoxel Incoherent Motion ◽  
Liver Lesions ◽  
Diffusion Weighted ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Apparent Diffusion

Background The utility of intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) related parameters in differentiation of hypovascular liver lesions is still unknown. Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the value of IVIM related parameters in comparison to apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for differentiation among intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (IMC), and hypovascular liver metastases (HLM). Methods Seventy-four prospectively enrolled patients (21 IMC, and 53 HLM) underwent 1.5T magnetic resonance examination with IVIM diffusion-weighted imaging using seven b values (0–800 s/mm2). Two independent readers performed quantitative analysis of IVIM-related parameters and ADC. Interobserver reliability was tested using a intraclass correlation coefficient. ADC, true diffusion coefficient (D), perfusion-related diffusion coefficient (D*), and perfusion fraction (ƒ) were compared among the lesions using Kruskal-Wallis H test. The diagnostic accuracy of each parameter was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Results The interobserver agreement was good for ADC (0.802), and excellent for D, D*, and ƒ (0.911, 0.927, and 0.942, respectively). ADC, and D values were significantly different among IMC and HLM (both p < 0.05), while there was no significant difference among these lesions for ƒ and D* (p = 0.101, and p = 0.612, respectively). ROC analysis showed higher diagnostic performance of D in comparison to ADC (AUC = 0.879 vs 0.821). Conclusion IVIM-derived parameters in particular D, in addition to ADC, could help in differentiation between most common hypovascular malignant liver lesions, intrahepatic mass—forming cholangiocarcinoma and hypovascular liver metastases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document