nach oben

Erschienen in:

04.11.2020 | Hepatobiliary-Pancreas

Hepatospecific MR contrast agent uptake on hepatobiliary phase can be used as a biomarker of marked β-catenin activation in hepatocellular adenoma

verfasst von: E. Reizine, M. Ronot, M. Ghosn, J. Calderaro, N. Frulio, P. Bioulac-Sage, H. Trillaud, V. Vilgrain, V. Paradis, A. Luciani

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 5/2021

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

To assess the value of hepatospecific MR contrast agent uptake on hepatobiliary phase (HBP) images to detect marked activation of the β-catenin pathway in hepatocellular adenomas (HCAs).

Methods

This multicentric retrospective IRB-approved study included all patients with a pathologically proven HCA who underwent gadobenate dimeglumine–enhanced liver MRI with HBP. Tumor signal intensity on HBP was first assessed visually, and lesions were classified into three distinct groups—hypointense, isointense, or hyperintense—according to the relative signal intensity to liver. Uptake was then quantified using the lesion-to-liver contrast enhancement ratio (LLCER). Finally, the accuracy of HBP analysis in depicting marked β-catenin activation in HCA was evaluated.

Results

A total of 124 HCAs were analyzed including 12 with marked β-catenin activation (HCA B+). Visual analysis classified 94/124 (76%), 12/124 (10%), and 18/124 (14%) HCAs as being hypointense, isointense, and hyperintense on HBP, respectively. Of these, 1/94 (1%), 3/12 (25%), and 8/18 (44%) were HCA B+, respectively (p < 0.001). The LLCER of HCA B+ was higher than that of HCA without marked β-catenin activation in the entire cohort (means 4.9 ± 11.8% vs. − 19.8 ± 11.4%, respectively, p < 0.001). A positive LLCER, i.e., LLCER ≥ 0%, had 75% (95% CI 43–95%) sensitivity and 97% (95% CI 92–99%) specificity, with a LR+ of 28 (95% CI 8.8–89.6) for the diagnosis of HCA B+.

Conclusions

Hepatospecific contrast uptake on hepatobiliary phase is strongly associated with marked activation of the β-catenin pathway in hepatocellular adenoma, and its use might improve hepatocellular adenoma subtyping on MRI.

Key Points

• Tumor uptake on hepatobiliary phase in both the visual and quantitative analyses had a specificity higher than 90% for the detection of marked β-catenin activation in hepatocellular adenoma.

• However, the sensitivity of visual analysis alone is inferior to that of LLCER quantification on HBP due to the high number of HCAs with signal hyperintensity on HBP, especially those developed on underlying liver steatosis.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Edmondson HA, Henderson B, Benton B (1976) Liver-cell adenomas associated with use of oral contraceptives. N Engl J Med 294:470–472. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197602262940904CrossRefPubMed

Nault J-C, Bioulac-Sage P, Zucman-Rossi J (2013) Hepatocellular benign tumors-from molecular classification to personalized clinical care. Gastroenterology 144:888–902. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2013.02.032CrossRefPubMed

Belghiti J, Cauchy F, Paradis V, Vilgrain V (2014) Diagnosis and management of solid benign liver lesions. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 11:737–749. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrgastro.2014.151CrossRefPubMed

European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) (2016) EASL clinical practice guidelines on the management of benign liver tumours. J Hepatol 65:386–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2016.04.001CrossRef

Dokmak S, Paradis V, Vilgrain V et al (2009) A single-center surgical experience of 122 patients with single and multiple hepatocellular adenomas. Gastroenterology 137:1698–1705. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2009.07.061CrossRefPubMed

Farges O, Ferreira N, Dokmak S, Belghiti J, Bedossa P, Paradis V (2011) Changing trends in malignant transformation of hepatocellular adenoma. Gut 60:85–89. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2010.222109

Nault J-C, Couchy G, Balabaud C et al (2017) Molecular classification of hepatocellular adenoma associates with risk factors, bleeding, and malignant transformation. Gastroenterology 152:880–894.e6. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2016.11.042CrossRefPubMed

Védie A-L, Sutter O, Ziol M, Nault J-C (2018) Molecular classification of hepatocellular adenomas: impact on clinical practice. Hepat Oncol 5. https://doi.org/10.2217/hep-2017-0023

Rebouissou S, Franconi A, Calderaro J et al (2016) Genotype-phenotype correlation of CTNNB1 mutations reveals different ß-catenin activity associated with liver tumor progression. Hepatology 64:2047–2061. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.28638CrossRefPubMed

10.

Zucman-Rossi J, Jeannot E, Nhieu JTV et al (2006) Genotype-phenotype correlation in hepatocellular adenoma: new classification and relationship with HCC. Hepatology 43:515–524. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.21068CrossRefPubMed

11.

Bioulac-Sage P, Sempoux C, Balabaud C (2017) Hepatocellular adenomas: morphology and genomics. Gastroenterol Clin N Am 46:253–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gtc.2017.01.003CrossRef

12.

Grazioli L, Morana G, Kirchin MA, Schneider G (2005) Accurate differentiation of focal nodular hyperplasia from hepatic adenoma at gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MR imaging: prospective study. Radiology 236:166–177. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2361040338CrossRefPubMed

13.

Grazioli L, Bondioni MP, Haradome H et al (2012) Hepatocellular adenoma and focal nodular hyperplasia: value of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging in differential diagnosis. Radiology 262:520–529. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11101742CrossRefPubMed

14.

Ba-Ssalamah A, Antunes C, Feier D et al (2015) Morphologic and molecular features of hepatocellular adenoma with gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 277:104–113. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015142366CrossRefPubMed

15.

Reizine E, Amaddeo G, Pigneur F et al (2018) Quantitative correlation between uptake of Gd-BOPTA on hepatobiliary phase and tumor molecular features in patients with benign hepatocellular lesions. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5438-7

16.

Sciarra A, Schmidt S, Pellegrinelli A et al (2019) OATPB1/B3 and MRP3 expression in hepatocellular adenoma predicts Gd-EOB-DTPA uptake and correlates with risk of malignancy. Liver Int 39:158–167. https://doi.org/10.1111/liv.13964CrossRefPubMed

17.

Laumonier H, Bioulac-Sage P, Laurent C, Zucman-Rossi J, Balabaud C, Trillaud H (2008) Hepatocellular adenomas: magnetic resonance imaging features as a function of molecular pathological classification. Hepatology 48:808–818. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.22417

18.

Ronot M, Vilgrain V (2014) Imaging of benign hepatocellular lesions: current concepts and recent updates. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol 38:681–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinre.2014.01.014CrossRefPubMed

19.

Bise S, Frulio N, Hocquelet A et al (2018) New MRI features improve subtype classification of hepatocellular adenoma. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5784-5

20.

Agarwal S, Fuentes-Orrego JM, Arnason T et al (2014) Inflammatory hepatocellular adenomas can mimic focal nodular hyperplasia on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:W408–W414. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.13.12251CrossRefPubMed

21.

Thomeer MG, Willemssen FE, Biermann KK et al (2014) MRI features of inflammatory hepatocellular adenomas on hepatocyte phase imaging with liver-specific contrast agents. J Magn Reson Imaging 39:1259–1264. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24281CrossRefPubMed

22.

Roux M, Pigneur F, Calderaro J et al (2015) Differentiation of focal nodular hyperplasia from hepatocellular adenoma: role of the quantitative analysis of gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced hepatobiliary phase MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 42:1249–1258. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24897CrossRefPubMed

23.

Reizine E, Ronot M, Pigneur F et al (2019) Iso- or hyperintensity of hepatocellular adenomas on hepatobiliary phase does not always correspond to hepatospecific contrast-agent uptake: importance for tumor subtyping. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06150-7

24.

Hale G, Liu X, Hu J et al (2016) Correlation of exon 3 β-catenin mutations with glutamine synthetase staining patterns in hepatocellular adenoma and hepatocellular carcinoma. Mod Pathol 29:1370–1380. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2016.122CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Cassidy FH, Yokoo T, Aganovic L et al (2009) Fatty liver disease: MR imaging techniques for the detection and quantification of liver steatosis. Radiographics 29:231–260. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.291075123CrossRefPubMed

26.

Denecke T, Steffen IG, Agarwal S et al (2012) Appearance of hepatocellular adenomas on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. Eur Radiol 22:1769–1775. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2422-5CrossRefPubMed

27.

Grieser C, Steffen IG, Kramme I-B et al (2014) Gadoxetic acid enhanced MRI for differentiation of FNH and HCA: a single centre experience. Eur Radiol 24:1339–1348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3144-7CrossRefPubMed

28.

Glockner JF, Lee CU, Mounajjed T (2017) Inflammatory hepatic adenomas: characterization with hepatobiliary MRI contrast agents. Magn Reson Imaging 47:103–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2017.12.006CrossRefPubMed

29.

Kim YK, Lee JM, Kim CS (2004) Gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced liver MR imaging: value of dynamic and delayed imaging for the characterization and detection of focal liver lesions. Eur Radiol 14:5–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-2115-1CrossRefPubMed

30.

Mamone G, Marrone G, Caruso S et al (2015) Intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma: enhancement pattern on Gd-BOPTA-MRI with emphasis of hepatobiliary phase. Abdom Imaging 40:2313–2322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0445-5CrossRefPubMed

31.

Gupta S, Naini BV, Munoz R et al (2015) Hepatocellular neoplasms arising in association with androgen use. Am J Surg Pathol 40. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000576

32.

Hata H, Inoue Y, Nakajima A, Komi S, Miyatake H (2017) Influence of the magnetic field strength on image contrast in Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging: comparison between 1.5T and 3.0T. Magn Reson Med Sci 16:109–114. https://doi.org/10.2463/mrms.mp.2015-0158

33.

Pascolo L, Cupelli F, Anelli PL et al (1999) Molecular mechanisms for the hepatic uptake of magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 257:746–752. https://doi.org/10.1006/bbrc.1999.0454CrossRefPubMed

34.

Vanhooymissen IJSML, Thomeer MG, Braun LMM et al (2019) Intrapatient comparison of the hepatobiliary phase of Gd-BOPTA and Gd-EOB-DTPA in the differentiation of hepatocellular adenoma from focal nodular hyperplasia. J Magn Reson Imaging 49:700–710. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26227CrossRefPubMed

35.

Cannella R, Brancatelli G, Rangaswamy B et al (2019) Enhancement pattern of hepatocellular adenoma (HCA) on MR imaging performed with Gd-EOB-DTPA versus other Gd-based contrast agents (GBCAs): an intraindividual comparison. Eur J Radiol 119:108633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.08.002CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Hepatospecific MR contrast agent uptake on hepatobiliary phase can be used as a biomarker of marked β-catenin activation in hepatocellular adenoma
verfasst von: E. Reizine
M. Ronot
M. Ghosn
J. Calderaro
N. Frulio
P. Bioulac-Sage
H. Trillaud
V. Vilgrain
V. Paradis
A. Luciani
Publikationsdatum: 04.11.2020
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Radiology / Ausgabe 5/2021
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07434-z

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Hepatospecific MR contrast agent uptake on hepatobiliary phase can be used as a biomarker of marked β-catenin activation in hepatocellular adenoma