Top

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Published in:

Open Access 01-06-2013 | Original Article

Functional imaging of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma with diffusion-weighted MRI and FDG PET/CT: quantitative analysis of ADC and SUV

Authors: Arthur Varoquaux, Olivier Rager, Karl-Olof Lovblad, Karen Masterson, Pavel Dulguerov, Osman Ratib, Christoph D. Becker, Minerva Becker

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Issue 6/2013

Abstract

Purpose

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) may cause a decreased apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW MRI) and an increased standardized uptake value (SUV) on fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET/CT). We analysed the reproducibility of ADC and SUV measurements in HNSCC and evaluated whether these biomarkers are correlated or independent.

Methods

This retrospective analysis of DW MRI and FDG PET/CT data series included 34 HNSCC in 33 consecutive patients. Two experienced readers measured tumour ADC and SUV values independently. Statistical comparison and correlation with histopathology was done. Intra- and inter-observer agreement for ADC and SUV measurements was assessed.

Results

Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis showed almost perfect reproducibility (>0.90) for ADC_mean, ADC_min, SUV_max and SUV_mean values for intra-observer and inter-observer agreement. Mean ADC_mean and ADC_min in HNSCC were 1.05 ± 0.34 × 10⁻³ mm²/s and 0.65 ± 0.29 × 10⁻³ mm²/s, respectively. Mean SUV_mean and mean SUV_max were 7.61 ± 3.87 and 12.8 ± 5.0, respectively. Although statistically not significant, a trend towards higher SUV and lower ADC was observed with increasing tumour dedifferentiation. Pearson’s correlation analysis showed no significant correlation between ADC and SUV measurements (r −0.103, −0.051; p 0.552, 0.777).

Conclusion

Our data suggest that ADC and SUV values are reproducible and independent biomarkers in HNSCC.

Argiris A, Karamouzis MV, Raben D, Ferris RL. Head and neck cancer. Lancet 2008;371:1695–709.PubMedCrossRef

Al-Ibraheem A, Buck A, Krause BJ, Scheidhauer K, Schwaiger M. Clinical applications of FDG PET and PET/CT in head and neck cancer. J Oncol 2009;2009:208725.PubMedCrossRef

Seitz O, Chambron-Pinho N, Middendorp M, Sader R, Mack M, Vogl TJ, et al. 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/CT to evaluate tumor, nodal disease, and gross tumor volume of oropharyngeal and oral cavity cancer: comparison with MR imaging and validation with surgical specimen. Neuroradiology 2009;51:677–86.PubMedCrossRef

Jacob R, Welkoborsky HJ, Mann WJ, Jauch M, Amedee R. [Fluorine-18]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, DNA ploidy and growth fraction in squamous-cell carcinomas of the head and neck. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2001;63:307–13.PubMedCrossRef

Keen H, Pichler B, Kukuk D, Duchamp O, Raguin O, Shannon A, et al. An evaluation of 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose and 3′-deoxy-3′-[18F]-fluorothymidine uptake in human tumor xenograft models. Mol Imaging Biol 2012;14:355–65.PubMedCrossRef

Chen Z, Ma L, Lou X, Zhou Z. Diagnostic value of minimum apparent diffusion coefficient values in prediction of neuroepithelial tumor grading. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010;31:1331–8.PubMedCrossRef

Zhang X-Y, Sun Y-S, Tang L, Xue W-C, Zhang X-P. Correlation of diffusion-weighted imaging data with apoptotic and proliferation indexes in CT26 colorectal tumor homografts in balb/c mouse. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;33:1171–6.PubMedCrossRef

Thoeny HC, De Keyzer F, King AD. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the head and neck. Radiology 2012;263:19–32.PubMedCrossRef

Wong CS, Gong N, Chu Y-C, Anthony M-P, Chan Q, Lee HF, et al. Correlation of measurements from diffusion weighted MR imaging and FDG PET/CT in GIST patients: ADC versus SUV. Eur J Radiol 2011;81:2122–6.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Regier M, Derlin T, Schwarz D, Laqmani A, Henes FO, Groth M, et al. Diffusion weighted MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): does the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) correlate with tracer uptake (SUV)? Eur J Radiol 2012;81:2913–8.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Ho K-C, Lin G, Wang J-J, Lai C-H, Chang C-J, Yen T-C. Correlation of apparent diffusion coefficients measured by 3T diffusion-weighted MRI and SUV from FDG PET/CT in primary cervical cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36:200–8.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Wu X, Korkola P, Pertovaara H, Eskola H, Järvenpää R, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen P-L. No correlation between glucose metabolism and apparent diffusion coefficient in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a PET/CT and DW-MRI study. Eur J Radiol 2011;79:e117–21.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Fruehwald-Pallamar J, Czerny C, Mayerhoefer ME, Halpern BS, Eder-Czembirek C, Brunner M, et al. Functional imaging in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: correlation of PET/CT and diffusion-weighted imaging at 3 Tesla. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38:1009–19.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Choi SH, Paeng JC, Sohn C-H, Pagsisihan JR, Kim Y-J, Kim KG, et al. Correlation of 18F-FDG uptake with apparent diffusion coefficient ratio measured on standard and high b value diffusion MRI in head and neck cancer. J Nucl Med 2011;52:1056–62.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Nakajo M, Nakajo M, Kajiya Y, Tani A, Kamiyama T, Yonekura R, et al. FDG PET/CT and diffusion-weighted imaging of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: comparison of prognostic significance between primary tumor standardized uptake value and apparent diffusion coefficient. Clin Nucl Med 2012;37:475–80.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Jackson T, Chung MK, Mercier G, Ozonoff A, Subramaniam RM. FDG PET/CT interobserver agreement in head and neck cancer: FDG and CT measurements of the primary tumor site. Nucl Med Commun 2012;33:305–12.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Verhappen MH, Pouwels PJW, Ljumanovic R, van der Putten L, Knol DL, De Bree R, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in head and neck cancer: comparison between half-Fourier acquired single-shot turbo spin-echo and EPI techniques. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1239–46.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Huang SC. Anatomy of SUV. Standardized uptake value. Nucl Med Biol 2000;27:643–6.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Donner A, Koval JJ. The estimation of intraclass correlation in the analysis of family data. Biometrics 1980;36:19–25.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159–74.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Kruskal W, Wallis A. Use of ranks in one-criterion variance Analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 1952;47:583.CrossRef

22.

Kwee TC, Takahara T, Luijten PR, Nievelstein RAJ. ADC measurements of lymph nodes: inter- and intra-observer reproducibility study and an overview of the literature. Eur J Radiol 2010;75:215–20.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Vandecaveye V, De Keyzer F, Vander Poorten V, Dirix P, Verbeken E, Nuyts S, et al. Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: value of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for nodal staging. Radiology 2009;251:134–46.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Vandecaveye V, Dirix P, De Keyzer F, de Beeck KO, Vander Poorten V, Roebben I, et al. Predictive value of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging during chemoradiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Eur Radiol 2010;20:1703–14.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Choi S, Cunningham DT, Aguila F, Corrigan JD, Bogner J, Mysiw WJ, et al. DTI at 7 and 3 T: systematic comparison of SNR and its influence on quantitative metrics. Magn Reson Imaging 2011;29:739–51.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Vandecaveye V, De Keyzer F, Nuyts S, Deraedt K, Dirix P, Hamaekers P, et al. Detection of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma with diffusion weighted MRI after (chemo)radiotherapy: correlation between radiologic and histopathologic findings. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;67:960–71.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Tshering Vogel DW, Zbaeren P, Geretschlaeger A, Vermathen P, De Keyzer F, Thoeny HC. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging including bi-exponential fitting for the detection of recurrent or residual tumour after (chemo)radiotherapy for laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers. Eur Radiol 2013;23:562–9.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Wang J, Takashima S, Takayama F, Kawakami S, Saito A, Matsushita T, et al. Head and neck lesions: characterization with diffusion-weighted echo-planar MR imaging. Radiology 2001;220:621–30.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Haerle SK, Huber GF, Hany TF, Ahmad N, Schmid DT. Is there a correlation between 18F-FDG-PET standardized uptake value, T-classification, histological grading and the anatomic subsites in newly diagnosed squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2010;267:1635–40.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Imsande HM, Davison JM, Truong MT, Devaiah AK, Mercier GA, Ozonoff AJ, et al. Use of 18F-FDG PET/CT as a predictive biomarker of outcome in patients with head-and-neck non-squamous cell carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197:976–80.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Chawla S, Kim S, Wang S, Poptani H. Diffusion-weighted imaging in head and neck cancers. Future Oncol 2009;5:959–75.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Koh D-M, Collins DJ. Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:1622–35.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Huisman TAGM, Loenneker T, Barta G, Bellemann ME, Hennig J, Fischer JE, et al. Quantitative diffusion tensor MR imaging of the brain: field strength related variance of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and fractional anisotropy (FA) scalars. Eur Radiol 2006;16:1651–8.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Rosenkrantz AB, Oei M, Babb JS, Niver BE, Taouli B. Diffusion-weighted imaging of the abdomen at 3.0 Tesla: image quality and apparent diffusion coefficient reproducibility compared with 1.5 Tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;33:128–35.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Notohamiprodjo M, Dietrich O, Horger W, Horng A, Helck AD, Herrmann KA, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) of the kidney at 3 tesla-feasibility, protocol evaluation and comparison to 1.5 Tesla. Invest Radiol 2010;45:245–54.PubMedCrossRef

36.

Kim S, Loevner L, Quon H, Sherman E, Weinstein G, Kilger A, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for predicting and detecting early response to chemoradiation therapy of squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck. Clin Cancer Res 2009;15:986–94.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Fushimi Y, Miki Y, Okada T, Yamamoto A, Mori N, Hanakawa T, et al. Fractional anisotropy and mean diffusivity: comparison between 3.0-T and 1.5-T diffusion tensor imaging with parallel imaging using histogram and region of interest analysis. NMR Biomed 2007;20:743–8.PubMedCrossRef

38.

Matsuoka A, Minato M, Harada M, Kubo H, Bandou Y, Tangoku A, et al. Comparison of 3.0- and 1.5-tesla diffusion-weighted imaging in the visibility of breast cancer. Radiat Med 2008;26:15–20.PubMedCrossRef

39.

Burger IA, Huser DM, Burger C, Von Schulthess GK, Buck A. Repeatability of FDG quantification in tumor imaging: averaged SUVs are superior to SUV(max). Nucl Med Biol 2012;39:666–70.PubMedCrossRef

40.

Jacene HA, Leboulleux S, Baba S, Chatzifotiadis D, Goudarzi B, Teytelbaum O, et al. Assessment of interobserver reproducibility in quantitative 18F-FDG PET and CT measurements of tumor response to therapy. J Nucl Med 2009;50:1760–9.PubMedCrossRef

41.

Benz MR, Evilevitch V, Allen-Auerbach MS, Eilber FC, Phelps ME, Czernin J, et al. Treatment monitoring by 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with sarcomas: interobserver variability of quantitative parameters in treatment-induced changes in histopathologically responding and nonresponding tumors. J Nucl Med 2008;49:1038–46.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Srinivasan A, Dvorak R, Rohrer S, Mukherji SK. Initial experience of 3-tesla apparent diffusion coefficient values in characterizing squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck. Acta Radiol 2008;49:1079–84.PubMedCrossRef

43.

Ichikawa Y, Sumi M, Sasaki M, Sumi T, Nakamura T. Efficacy of diffusion-weighted imaging for the differentiation between lymphomas and carcinomas of the nasopharynx and oropharynx: correlations of apparent diffusion coefficients and histologic features. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:761–6.PubMedCrossRef

44.

Machtay M, Natwa M, Andrel J, Hyslop T, Anne PR, Lavarino J, et al. Pretreatment FDG-PET standardized uptake value as a prognostic factor for outcome in head and neck cancer. Head Neck 2009;31:195–201.PubMedCrossRef

45.

Higgins KA, Hoang JK, Roach MC, Chino J, Yoo DS, Turkington TG, et al. Analysis of pretreatment FDG-PET SUV parameters in head-and-neck cancer: tumor SUVmean has superior prognostic value. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012;82:548–53.PubMedCrossRef

46.

Wong RJ, Lin DT, Schöder H, Patel SG, Gonen M, Wolden S, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic value of [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:4199–208.PubMedCrossRef

47.

Masterson K, Rager O, Kohler R, Wissmeyer M, Ratib O, Becker M. MR/PET image fusion: feasibility and utility in the loco-regional assessment of head and neck cancer. SS415, Proceedings of the 11th Annual Congress Swiss Society of Nuclear Medicine, 3–5 June 2010, Lugano. Nuklearmed-Nucl Med 2010;49(3):A127.

48.

Park SH, Moon WK, Cho N, Chang JM, Im S-A, Park IA, et al. Comparison of diffusion-weighted MR imaging and FDG PET/CT to predict pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2012;22:18–25.PubMedCrossRef

Title: Functional imaging of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma with diffusion-weighted MRI and FDG PET/CT: quantitative analysis of ADC and SUV
Authors: Arthur Varoquaux
Olivier Rager
Karl-Olof Lovblad
Karen Masterson
Pavel Dulguerov
Osman Ratib
Christoph D. Becker
Minerva Becker
Publication date: 01-06-2013
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue 6/2013
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2351-9

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Functional imaging of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma with diffusion-weighted MRI and FDG PET/CT: quantitative analysis of ADC and SUV

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2013

Potential of 18F-FDG PET toward personalized radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in lung cancer

Tumour volume delineation in prostate cancer assessed by [11C]choline PET/CT: validation with surgical specimens

Thyroglobulin levels and thyroglobulin doubling time independently predict a positive 18F-FDG PET/CT scan in patients with biochemical recurrence of differentiated thyroid carcinoma

Perfusion-like template and standardized normalization-based brain image analysis using 18F-florbetapir (AV-45/Amyvid) PET

Area under the cumulative SUV-volume histogram is not a viable metric of intratumoral metabolic heterogeneity

18F-Fluorodihydroxyphenylalanine vs other radiopharmaceuticals for imaging neuroendocrine tumours according to their type