Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 10/2014

01-10-2014 | Magnetic Resonance

Can magnetic resonance spectroscopy differentiate endometrial cancer?

Authors: Jie Zhang, Shifeng Cai, Changzhong Li, Xichao Sun, Xue Han, Chunrun Yang, Caixia Fu, Qingwei Liu, Yinghui Xin, Yuanyuan Zong

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 10/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To investigate whether the choline-containing compounds (Cho) obtained from three-dimensional 1H magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy can differentiate endometrial cancer (ECa) from benign lesions in endometria or in submucosa (BLs-ESm) and is associated with the aggressiveness of ECa.

Methods

Fifty-seven patients (ECa, 38; BLs-ESm, 19) underwent preoperative multi-voxel MR spectroscopy at 3.0 T. The ratio of the sum of the Cho peak integral to the sum of the unsuppressed water peak integral (Cho/water) and the coefficient of variation (CV) used to describe the variability of Cho/water in one lesion were calculated.

Results

Mean Cho/water (±standard deviation [SD]) was (3.02 ± 1.43) × 10−3 for ECa and (1.68 ± 0.33) × 10−3 for BLs-ESm (p < 0.001). Mean Cho/water was (4.42 ± 1.53) × 10−3 for type II ECa and (2.65 ± 1.17) × 10−3 for type I ECa (p = 0.001). There were no significant differences among different stages of ECa (p = 0.107) or different grades of ECa (p = 0.142). The Cho/water was positively correlated with tumour stage (r = 0.386, p = 0.017) and size (r = 0.333, p = 0.041). The CV was also positively correlated with tumour stage (r = 0.537, p = 0.001) and size (r = 0.34, p = 0.037).

Conclusion

The Cho/water can differentiate ECa from BLs-ESm and differentiate type II from type I ECa, but cannot differentiate different stages of ECa or different grades of ECa. Cho/water increased with the increase of tumour stage and size.

Key Points

• First report to attempt to assess ECa aggressiveness with magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS).
• MRS can differentiate type I from type II ECa.
• MRS can differentiate ECa from BLs-ESm.
• MRS cannot differentiate different stages of ECa or different grades of ECa.
• Cho/water increased with the increase of tumour stage and size.
Literature
1.
Nofech-Mozes S, Ghorab Z, Ismiil N et al (2008) Endometrial endometrioid adenocarcinoma: a pathologic analysis of 827 consecutive cases. Am J Clin Pathol 129:110–114PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zhu HL, Liang XD, Wang JL, Cui H, Wei LH (2010) Hysteroscopy and directed biopsy in the diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma. Chin Med J (Engl) 123:3524–3528
3.
Obermair A, Geramou M, Gucer F et al (2000) Does hysteroscopy facilitate tumor cell dissemination? Incidence of peritoneal cytology from patients with early stage endometrial carcinoma following dilatation and curettage (D & C) versus hysteroscopy and D & C. Cancer 88:139–143PubMedCrossRef
4.
Polyzos NP, Mauri D, Tsioras S, Messini CI, Valachis A, Messinis IE (2010) Intraperitoneal dissemination of endometrial cancer cells after hysteroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 20:261–267PubMedCrossRef
5.
Vargas HA, Akin O, Zheng J et al (2011) The value of MR imaging when the site of uterine cancer origin is uncertain. Radiology 258:785–792PubMedCrossRef
6.
Inada Y, Matsuki M, Nakai G et al (2009) Body diffusion-weighted MR imaging of uterine endometrial cancer: is it helpful in the detection of cancer in nonenhanced MR imaging? Eur J Radiol 70:122–127PubMedCrossRef
7.
Park BK, Kim B, Park JM et al (2006) Differentiation of the various lesions causing an abnormality of the endometrial cavity using MR imaging: emphasis on enhancement patterns on dynamic studies and late contrast-enhanced T1-weighted images. Eur Radiol 16:1591–1598PubMedCrossRef
8.
Thomassin-Naggara I, Dechoux S, Bonneau C et al (2013) How to differentiate benign from malignant myometrial tumours using MR imaging. Eur Radiol 23:2306–2314PubMedCrossRef
9.
Haldorsen IS, Salvesen HB (2012) Staging of endometrial carcinomas with MRI using traditional and novel MRI techniques. Clin Radiol 67:2–12PubMedCrossRef
10.
Haldorsen IS, Husby JA, Werner HM et al (2012) Standard 1.5-T MRI of endometrial carcinomas: modest agreement between radiologists. Eur Radiol 22:1601–1611PubMedCrossRef
11.
Majos C, Alonso J, Aguilera C et al (2003) Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy ((1)H MRS) of human brain tumours: assessment of differences between tumour types and its applicability in brain tumour categorization. Eur Radiol 13:582–591PubMed
12.
Bartella L, Huang W (2007) Proton (1H) MR spectroscopy of the breast. Radiographics 27(Suppl 1):S241–S252PubMedCrossRef
13.
Kobus T, Vos PC, Hambrock T et al (2012) Prostate cancer aggressiveness: in vivo assessment of MR spectroscopy and diffusion-weighted imaging at 3 T. Radiology 265:457–467PubMedCrossRef
14.
Takeuchi M, Matsuzaki K, Harada M (2011) Differentiation of benign and malignant uterine corpus tumors by using proton MR spectroscopy at 3 T: preliminary study. Eur Radiol 21:850–856PubMedCrossRef
15.
Stefan D, Cesare FD, Andrasescu A et al (2009) Quantitation of magnetic resonance spectroscopy signals: the jMRUI software package. Meas Sci Technol 20:104035CrossRef
16.
17.
van der Meer RW, Doornbos J, Kozerke S et al (2007) Metabolic imaging of myocardial triglyceride content: reproducibility of 1H MR spectroscopy with respiratory navigator gating in volunteers. Radiology 245:251–257PubMedCrossRef
18.
Creasman W (2009) Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 105:109PubMedCrossRef
19.
Celik O, Hascalik S, Sarac K, Meydanli MM, Alkan A, Mizrak B (2005) Magnetic resonance spectroscopy of premalignant and malignant endometrial disorders: a feasibility of in vivo study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 118:241–245PubMedCrossRef
20.
Okada T, Harada M, Matsuzaki K, Nishitani H, Aono T (2001) Evaluation of female intrapelvic tumors by clinical proton MR spectroscopy. J Magn Reson Imaging 13:912–917PubMedCrossRef
21.
Mahon MM, Cox IJ, Dina R et al (2004) (1)H magnetic resonance spectroscopy of preinvasive and invasive cervical cancer: in vivo-ex vivo profiles and effect of tumor load. J Magn Reson Imaging 19:356–364PubMedCrossRef
22.
Booth SJ, Pickles MD, Turnbull LW (2009) In vivo magnetic resonance spectroscopy of gynaecological tumours at 3.0 Tesla. BJOG 116:300–303PubMedCrossRef
23.
Glunde K, Bhujwalla ZM, Ronen SM (2011) Choline metabolism in malignant transformation. Nat Rev Cancer 11:835–848PubMed
24.
Indermaur MD, Shoup B, Tebes S, Lancaster JM (2007) The accuracy of frozen pathology at time of hysterectomy in patients with complex atypical hyperplasia on preoperative biopsy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 196:e40–e42PubMedCrossRef
25.
Eddib A, Allaf B, Lee J, Yeh J (2012) Risk for advanced-stage endometrial cancer in surgical specimens from patients with complex endometrial hyperplasia with atypia. Gynecol Obstet Invest 73:38–42PubMedCrossRef
26.
Trimble CL, Kauderer J, Zaino R et al (2006) Concurrent endometrial carcinoma in women with a biopsy diagnosis of atypical endometrial hyperplasia: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Cancer 106:812–819PubMedCrossRef
27.
Karamursel BS, Guven S, Tulunay G, Kucukali T, Ayhan A (2005) Which surgical procedure for patients with atypical endometrial hyperplasia? Int J Gynecol Cancer 15:127–131PubMedCrossRef
28.
Hunn J, Dodson MK, Webb J, Soisson AP (2009) Endometrial cancer–current state of the art therapies and unmet clinical needs: the role of surgery and preoperative radiographic assessment. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 61:890–895PubMedCrossRef
29.
McLean MA, Priest AN, Joubert I et al (2009) Metabolic characterization of primary and metastatic ovarian cancer by 1H-MRS in vivo at 3 T. Magn Reson Med 62:855–861PubMedCrossRef
30.
Rechichi G, Galimberti S, Signorelli M et al (2011) Endometrial cancer: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient with tumor grade, depth of myometrial invasion, and presence of lymph node metastases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:256–262PubMedCrossRef
31.
Cao K, Gao M, Sun YS et al (2012) Apparent diffusion coefficient of diffusion weighted MRI in endometrial carcinoma—relationship with local invasiveness. Eur J Radiol 81:1926–1930PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Can magnetic resonance spectroscopy differentiate endometrial cancer?
Authors
Jie Zhang
Shifeng Cai
Changzhong Li
Xichao Sun
Xue Han
Chunrun Yang
Caixia Fu
Qingwei Liu
Yinghui Xin
Yuanyuan Zong
Publication date
01-10-2014
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 10/2014
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3237-3

Other articles of this Issue 10/2014

European Radiology 10/2014 Go to the issue

Computed Tomography

Tube potential can be lowered to 80 kVp in test bolus phase of CT coronary angiography (CTCA) and CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) to save dose without compromising diagnostic quality

Urogenital

Correlation between dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and quantitative histopathologic microvascular parameters in organ-confined prostate cancer

Pediatric

“Black Bone” MRI: a potential alternative to CT with three-dimensional reconstruction of the craniofacial skeleton in the diagnosis of craniosynostosis

Computed Tomography

Dual-energy computed tomography after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: The role of hard plaque imaging for endoleak detection

Chest

A high-resolution computed tomography-based scoring system to differentiate the most infectious active pulmonary tuberculosis from community-acquired pneumonia in elderly and non-elderly patients

Interventional

Volumetric MR-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound versus uterine artery embolisation for treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids: comparison of symptom improvement and reintervention rates