Dynamic contrast enhancement magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) for differential diagnosis in head and neck cancers
Publication in refereed journal
CUHK Authors
Full Text
Digital Object Identifier (DOI) DOI for CUHK Users View Full-text in Publisher Website |
Times Cited
Altmetrics Information
.
Other information
AbstractPurpose:
To examine the potential of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI)
for differential diagnosis of head and neck cancer.
Methods and materials:
DCE-MRI was performed in 26 patients with untreated squamous cell carcinoma
(SCC), 28 undifferentiated carcinoma (UD) and 8 lymphoma. DCE-MRI was analyzed with the pharmacokinetic
model proposed by Tofts and Kermode to produce the three DCE parameters: ktrans, ve and
vp. Areas under the curve (AUC) at the initial 60 and 90 s (AUC60 and AUC90) were also recorded. Histogram
analysis was conducted to obtain the mean, 25%, 50%, 75% and 95% percentile values and the
Kruskal–Wallis test was used to compare the DCE parameters between the three groups of cancer.
Results:
ktrans, AUC60 and AUC90 showed significant differences (p < 0.01) between UD/SCC and
UD/lymphoma, but not between SCC/lymphoma. The mean AUC90 demonstrated the highest accuracy of
78% (sensitivity of 68% and specificity of 88%) for distinguishing UD and SCC, and the 75% percentile AUC90
provided the highest accuracy of 97% (sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 88.5%) for distinguishing UD
and lymphoma.
Conclusions:
There are significant differences in the DCE parameters which show the potential for distinguishing
UD from SCC or lymphoma.
To examine the potential of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI)
for differential diagnosis of head and neck cancer.
Methods and materials:
DCE-MRI was performed in 26 patients with untreated squamous cell carcinoma
(SCC), 28 undifferentiated carcinoma (UD) and 8 lymphoma. DCE-MRI was analyzed with the pharmacokinetic
model proposed by Tofts and Kermode to produce the three DCE parameters: ktrans, ve and
vp. Areas under the curve (AUC) at the initial 60 and 90 s (AUC60 and AUC90) were also recorded. Histogram
analysis was conducted to obtain the mean, 25%, 50%, 75% and 95% percentile values and the
Kruskal–Wallis test was used to compare the DCE parameters between the three groups of cancer.
Results:
ktrans, AUC60 and AUC90 showed significant differences (p < 0.01) between UD/SCC and
UD/lymphoma, but not between SCC/lymphoma. The mean AUC90 demonstrated the highest accuracy of
78% (sensitivity of 68% and specificity of 88%) for distinguishing UD and SCC, and the 75% percentile AUC90
provided the highest accuracy of 97% (sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 88.5%) for distinguishing UD
and lymphoma.
Conclusions:
There are significant differences in the DCE parameters which show the potential for distinguishing
UD from SCC or lymphoma.
Acceptance Date20/01/2011
All Author(s) ListFrancis Kar-ho Lee, Ann Dorothy King, Brigitte Buig-Yue Ma, David Ka-wai Yeung
Journal nameEuropean Journal of Radiology
Year2012
Month4
Volume Number81
Issue Number4
PublisherELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
Pages784 - 788
ISSN0720-048X
eISSN1872-7727
LanguagesEnglish-United Kingdom
KeywordsDynamic contrast enhancement magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI), Squamous cell carcinoma, Undifferentiated carcinoma and lymphoma, Diagnosis
Web of Science Subject CategoriesRadiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging; RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
