Top

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Published in:

01-08-2014 | Gynecologic Oncology

Histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient for the assessment of local aggressiveness of cervical cancer

Authors: Huadan Xue, Cui Ren, Jiaxin Yang, Zhaoyong Sun, Shuo Li, Zhengyu Jin, Keng Shen, Weixun Zhou

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 2/2014

Abstract

Purpose

To retrospectively explore the value of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) histogram in assessing local aggressiveness of cervical cancer.

Methods

53 patients with cervical cancer, including 7 cases at stage IB1, 17 cases at stage IB2 and 29 cases at stage IIA, were subjected to preoperative MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging with b values of 0 and 800 s/mm². The average of mean ADC values (ADC_mean), minimum ADC values (ADC_min) and the 5th to 85th percentile ADC values every 10 % (ADC_5 %, ADC_15 %, ADC_85 %) were measured. ADC values were compared between subgroups according to pathologic subtype, histological differentiation, depth of cervical infiltration, and lymph node metastases.

Results

ADC_mean and ADC_min for adenocarcinoma were 1,170.3 ± 97.8 × 10⁻⁶ and 748.7 ± 157.5 × 10⁻⁶ mm² s⁻¹, respectively, significantly higher than that of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (1,053.8 ± 134.3 × 10⁻⁶ and 615.6 ± 170.2 × 10⁻⁶ mm² s⁻¹, respectively). ADC_mean and ADC_5 %–ADC_85 % of well or moderately tumor were significantly higher than poorly differentiated tumor, but ADC_min was not significantly different among different differentiated cervical cancer. Only ADC_5 %–ADC_45 % could discriminate well or moderately differentiated SCC from poorly differentiated SCC. ADC_5 % for distinguishing well/moderately from poorly differentiated cervical cancer had a largest AUC (0.83). There was no statistical difference in ADC value for different depth of cervical infiltration or lymph node metastases.

Conclusions

ADC values are helpful in assessing pathologic subtype and the differentiation of cervical cancer.

Orfanoudaki IM, Kappou D, Sifakis S (2011) Recent advances in optical imaging for cervical cancer detection. Arch Gynecol Obstet 284:1197–1208PubMedCrossRef

Tong T, Yajia G, Huaying W, Weijun P (2012) Application of 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging in endometrial cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet 285:1113–1118PubMedCrossRef

Biewenga P, van der Velden J, Mol BW, Stalpers LJ, Schilthuis MS, van der Steeg JW, Burger MP, Buist MR (2011) Prognostic model for survival in patients with early stage cervical cancer. Cancer 117:768–776PubMedCrossRef

Stenstedt K, Hellström AC, Fridsten S, Blomqvist L (2011) Impact of MRI in the management and staging of cancer of the uterine cervix. Acta Oncol 50:420–426PubMedCrossRef

Duncan KA, Drinkwater KJ, Frost C, Remedios D, Barter S (2012) Staging cancer of the uterus: a national audit of MRI accuracy. Clin Radiol 67:523–530PubMedCrossRef

Hamstra DA, Rehemtulla A, Ross BD (2007) Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging: a biomarker for treatment response in oncology. J Clin Oncol 25:4104–4109PubMedCrossRef

Punwani S (2011) Diffusion weighted imaging of female pelvic cancers: concepts and clinical applications. Eur J Radiol 78:21–29PubMedCrossRef

Li S, Sun F, Jin ZY et al (2007) Whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging: technical improvement and preliminary results. J Magn Reson Imaging 26:1139–1144PubMedCrossRef

Nakamura K, Joja I, Nagasaka T et al (2012) The mean apparent diffusion coefficient value (ADCmean) on primary cervical cancer is a predictive marker for disease recurrence. Gynecol Oncol 127:478–483PubMedCrossRef

10.

Tozer DJ, Jäger HR, Danchaivijitr N et al (2007) Apparent diffusion coefficient histograms may predict low-grade glioma subtype. NMR Biomed 20:49–57PubMedCrossRef

11.

Costantini M, Belli P, Rinaldi P et al (2010) Diffusion-weighted imaging in breast cancer: relationship between apparent diffusion coefficient and tumour aggressiveness. Clin Radiol 65:1005–1012PubMedCrossRef

12.

Itou Y, Nakanishi K, Narumi Y, Nishizawa Y, Tsukuma H (2011) Clinical utility of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in patients with prostate cancer: can ADC values contribute to assess the aggressiveness of prostate cancer? J Magn Reson Imaging 33:167–172PubMedCrossRef

13.

Barajas RF Jr, Rubenstein JL, Chang JS, Hwang J, Cha S (2010) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging derived apparent diffusion coefficient is predictive of clinical outcome in primary central nervous system lymphoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 31:60–66PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

14.

Liu Y, Bai R, Sun H, Liu H, Wang D (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of uterine cervical cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 33:858–862PubMedCrossRef

15.

Payne GS, Schmidt M, Morgan VA et al (2010) Evaluation of magnetic resonance diffusion and spectroscopy measurements as predictive biomarkers in stage 1 cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 116:246–252PubMedCrossRef

16.

Kang Y, Choi SH, Kim YJ et al (2011) Gliomas: histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient maps with standard- or high-b-value diffusion-weighted MR imaging—correlation with tumor grade. Radiology 261:882–890PubMedCrossRef

17.

Kyriazi S, Collins DJ, Messiou C et al (2011) Metastatic ovarian and primary peritoneal cancer: assessing chemotherapy response with diffusion-weighted MR imaging—value of histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficients. Radiology 26:182–192CrossRef

18.

McVeigh PZ, Syed AM, Milosevic M, Fyles A, Haider MA (2008) Diffusion-weighted MRI in cervical cancer. Eur Radiol 18:1058–1064PubMedCrossRef

19.

Abu-Rustum NR, Alektiar K, Iasonos A et al (2006) The incidence of symptomatic lower-extremity lymphedema following treatment of uterine corpus malignancies: a 12-year experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Gynecol Oncol 103:714–718PubMedCrossRef

20.

Alexander-Sefre F, Chee N, Spencer C et al (2006) Surgical morbidity associated with radical trachelectomy and radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol 101:450–454PubMedCrossRef

21.

Pieterse QD, Maas CP, ter Kuile MM et al (2006) An observational longitudinal study to evaluate miction, defecation, and sexual function after radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for earlystage cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 16:1119–1129PubMedCrossRef

22.

Meirovitz M, Sade S, Dreiher J et al (2013) Is radical hysterectomy necessary in early cervical cancer? Gynecol Obstet Invest 76:158–162PubMedCrossRef

23.

Pluta M, Rob L, Charvat M et al (2009) Less radical surgery than radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer: a pilot study. Gynecol Oncol 113:181–184PubMedCrossRef

24.

Kim MK, Kim JW, Kim MA et al (2010) Feasibility of less radical surgery for superficially invasive carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol 119:187–191PubMedCrossRef

25.

Kodama J, Kusumoto T, Nakamura K et al (2011) Factors associated with parametrial involvement in stage IB1 cervical cancer and identification of patients suitable for less radical surgery. Gynecol Oncol 122:491–494PubMedCrossRef

26.

Motoshima S, Irie H, Nakazono T, Kamura T, Kudo S (2011) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in gynecologic cancers. J Gynecol Oncol 22:275–287PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

27.

Zou QG, Xu HB, Liu F, Guo W, Kong XC, Wu Y (2011) In the assessment of supratentorial glioma grade: the combined role of multivoxel proton MR spectroscopy and diffusion tensor imaging. Clin Radiol 66:953–960PubMedCrossRef

28.

Curvo-Semedo L, Lambregts DM, Maas M, Beets GL, Caseiro-Alves F, Beets-Tan RG (2012) Diffusion-weighted MRI in rectal cancer: apparent diffusion coefficient as a potential noninvasive marker of tumor aggressiveness. J Magn Reson Imaging 35:1365–1371PubMedCrossRef

29.

Nishie A, Tajima T, Asayama Y et al (2011) Diagnostic performance of apparent diffusion coefficient for predicting histological grade of hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Radiol 80:e29–e33PubMedCrossRef

30.

Razek AA, Fathy A, Gawad TA (2011) Correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient value with prognostic parameters of lung cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 35:248–252PubMedCrossRef

31.

Matoba M, Tonami H, Kondou T et al (2007) Lung carcinoma: diffusion-weighted mr imaging—preliminary evaluation with apparent diffusion coefficient. Radiology 243:570–577PubMedCrossRef

32.

Dzik-Jurasz A, Domenig C, George M et al (2002) Diffusion MRI for prediction of response of rectal cancer to chemoradiation. Lancet 27:307–308CrossRef

33.

Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Kochi M et al (1999) Usefulness of diffusion-weighted MRI with echo-planar technique in the evaluation of cellularity in gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 9:53–60PubMedCrossRef

34.

Verma S, Rajesh A, Morales H et al (2011) Assessment of aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient with histologic grade after radical prostatectomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196:374–381PubMedCrossRef

Title: Histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient for the assessment of local aggressiveness of cervical cancer
Authors: Huadan Xue
Cui Ren
Jiaxin Yang
Zhaoyong Sun
Shuo Li
Zhengyu Jin
Keng Shen
Weixun Zhou
Publication date: 01-08-2014
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3221-9

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient for the assessment of local aggressiveness of cervical cancer

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2014

Erratum to: Breastfeeding in Byzantine icon art

Pathologic prognostic factors in stage I–III uterine carcinosarcoma treated with postoperative radiotherapy

Impact of luteal phase hysteroscopy and concurrent endometrial biopsy on subsequent IVF cycle outcome

Message from the Editor-in-Chief

Could platelet distribution width be a predictive marker for unexplained recurrent miscarriage?

Effects of unilateral ovariectomy on female fertility outcome