nach oben

18.10.2019 | Musculoskeletal

Soft tissue sarcoma: DWI and DCE-MRI parameters correlate with Ki-67 labeling index

verfasst von: Ji Hyun Lee, Young Cheol Yoon, Sung Wook Seo, Yoon-La Choi, Hyun Su Kim

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

To examine the correlation of diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) parameters with Ki-67 labeling index (LI) in soft tissue sarcoma (STS).

Methods

The institutional review board approved this retrospective study, and the requirement for informed consent was waived. Thirty-six patients with STS who underwent 3.0-T MRI, including diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, between July 2011 and February 2018, were included in this study. The mean and minimum apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) (ADC_mean and ADC_min, respectively), volume transfer constant, reflux rate, and volume fraction of the extravascular extracellular matrix of each lesion were independently analyzed by two readers. Their relationship with the Ki-67 LI was examined using Spearman’s correlation analyses. Differences between low- and high-proliferation groups based on Ki-67 LI were evaluated statistically. Optimal cut-off points were determined using the area under the curve analysis for significant parameters. Interobserver agreement was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient.

Results

ADC_mean (ρ = − 0.333, p = 0.047) was significantly and inversely correlated with Ki-67 LI. The high-proliferation group showed a significantly lower ADC_mean than did the low-proliferation group (median, 1.08 vs. 1.20; p = 0.048). When a cut-off ADC_mean value of 1.16 × 10⁻³ mm²/s was used, the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve for differentiating low- and high-proliferation groups were 75.0%, 60.0%, and 0.712, respectively. Interobserver agreements between the two readers were almost perfect for all parameters.

Conclusions

ADC_mean was correlated with Ki-67 LI and could help differentiate between STS with low and high proliferation potential.

Key Points

• ADC _mean was significantly and inversely correlated with Ki-67 labeling index in soft tissue sarcoma.

• In the high-proliferation group, ADC _mean values were significantly lower than those of the low-proliferation group.

Fletcher CDM, Bridge JA, Hogendoorn PCW, Mertens F (2013) WHO classification of tumours of soft tissue and bone. IARC Press, Lyon

Trojani M, Contesso G, Coindre JM et al (1984) Soft-tissue sarcomas of adults; study of pathological prognostic variables and definition of a histopathological grading system. Int J Cancer 33:37–42CrossRef

Neuville A, Chibon F, Coindre JM (2014) Grading of soft tissue sarcomas: from histological to molecular assessment. Pathology 46:113–120CrossRef

Engellau J (2004) Prognostic factors in soft tissue sarcoma. Tissue microarray for immunostaining, the importance of whole-tumor sections and time-dependence. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 75:1–52CrossRef

Tanaka K, Hasegawa T, Nojima T et al (2016) Prospective evaluation of Ki-67 system in histological grading of soft tissue sarcomas in the Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study JCOG0304. World J Surg Oncol 14:110CrossRef

Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A'Hern R et al (2011) Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the international Ki67 in breast cancer working group. J Natl Cancer Inst 103:1656–1664CrossRef

Hasegawa T, Yamamoto S, Yokoyama R, Umeda T, Matsuno Y, Hirohashi S (2002) Prognostic significance of grading and staging systems using MIB-1 score in adult patients with soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities and trunk. Cancer 95:843–851CrossRef

Rudolph P, Kellner U, Chassevent A et al (1997) Prognostic relevance of a novel proliferation marker, Ki-S11, for soft-tissue sarcoma. A multivariate study. Am J Pathol 150:1997–2007PubMedPubMedCentral

Hasegawa T, Yokoyama R, Lee YH, Shimoda T, Beppu Y, Hirohashi S (2000) Prognostic relevance of a histological grading system using MIB-1 for adult soft-tissue sarcoma. Oncology 58:66–74CrossRef

10.

Levine EA, Holzmayer T, Bacus S et al (1997) Evaluation of newer prognostic markers for adult soft tissue sarcomas. J Clin Oncol 15:3249–3257CrossRef

11.

Hoos A, Stojadinovic A, Mastorides S et al (2001) High Ki-67 proliferative index predicts disease specific survival in patients with high-risk soft tissue sarcomas. Cancer 92:869–874CrossRef

12.

Domingues R, Costa F (2018) Advanced musculoskeletal MR imaging, an issue of magnetic resonance imaging clinics of north America. Elsevier Health Sciences

13.

Subhawong TK, Jacobs MA, Fayad LM (2014) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging for characterizing musculoskeletal lesions. Radiographics 34:1163–1177CrossRef

14.

Breault SR, Heye T, Bashir MR et al (2013) Quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of pelvic and lumbar bone marrow: effect of age and marrow fat content on pharmacokinetic parameter values. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200:W297–W303CrossRef

15.

Tofts PS (1997) Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 7:91–101CrossRef

16.

Yoon MA, Chee CG, Chung HW et al (2019) Added value of diffusion-weighted imaging to conventional MRI for predicting fascial involvement of soft tissue sarcomas. Eur Radiol 29:1863–1873CrossRef

17.

Sagiyama K, Watanabe Y, Kamei R et al (2017) Multiparametric voxel-based analyses of standardized uptake values and apparent diffusion coefficients of soft-tissue tumours with a positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance system: preliminary results. Eur Radiol 27:5024–5033CrossRef

18.

Chhabra A, Ashikyan O, Slepicka C et al (2019) Conventional MR and diffusion-weighted imaging of musculoskeletal soft tissue malignancy: correlation with histologic grading. Eur Radiol 29:4485–4494CrossRef

19.

Razek AA (2012) Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging of chest tumors. Cancer Imaging 12:452–463CrossRef

20.

Siemann DW (2011) The unique characteristics of tumor vasculature and preclinical evidence for its selective disruption by tumor-vascular disrupting agents. Cancer Treat Rev 37:63–74CrossRef

21.

Lee JH, Yoon YC, Jin W, Cha JG, Kim S (2019) Development and validation of nomograms for malignancy prediction in soft tissue tumors using magnetic resonance imaging measurements. Sci Rep 9:4897CrossRef

22.

Jeon JY, Chung HW, Lee MH, Lee SH, Shin MJ (2016) Usefulness of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for differentiating between benign and malignant superficial soft tissue tumours and tumour-like lesions. Br J Radiol 89:20150929CrossRef

23.

Subhawong TK, Jacobs MA, Fayad LM (2014) Insights into quantitative diffusion-weighted MRI for musculoskeletal tumor imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:560–572CrossRef

24.

Fram EK, Herfkens RJ, Johnson GA et al (1987) Rapid calculation of T1 using variable flip angle gradient refocused imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 5:201–208CrossRef

25.

Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL et al (1999) Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging 10:223–232CrossRef

26.

Parker GJ, Roberts C, Macdonald A et al (2006) Experimentally-derived functional form for a population-averaged high-temporal-resolution arterial input function for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 56:993–1000CrossRef

27.

Song Y, Yoon YC, Chong Y et al (2017) Diagnostic performance of conventional MRI parameters and apparent diffusion coefficient values in differentiating between benign and malignant soft-tissue tumours. Clin Radiol 72:691 e10

28.

Oka K, Yakushiji T, Sato H et al (2011) Usefulness of diffusion-weighted imaging for differentiating between desmoid tumors and malignant soft tissue tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging 33:189–193CrossRef

29.

Crombe A, Marcellin PJ, Buy X et al (2019) Soft-tissue sarcomas: assessment of MRI features correlating with histologic grade and patient outcome. Radiology 291:710–721CrossRef

30.

Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRef

31.

Zhang XY, Sun YS, Tang L, Xue WC, Zhang XP (2011) Correlation of diffusion-weighted imaging data with apoptotic and proliferation indexes in CT26 colorectal tumor homografts in balb/c mouse. J Magn Reson Imaging 33:1171–1176CrossRef

32.

Mori N, Ota H, Mugikura S et al (2015) Luminal-type breast cancer: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficients with the Ki-67 labeling index. Radiology 274:66–73CrossRef

33.

Surov A, Caysa H, Wienke A, Spielmann RP, Fiedler E (2015) Correlation between different ADC fractions, cell count, Ki-67, Total nucleic areas and average nucleic areas in meningothelial meningiomas. Anticancer Res 35:6841–6846PubMed

34.

Sun M, Cheng J, Zhang Y et al (2018) Application of DWIBS in malignant lymphoma: correlation between ADC values and Ki-67 index. Eur Radiol 28:1701–1708CrossRef

35.

Yeo DM, Oh SN, Jung CK et al (2015) Correlation of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI perfusion parameters with angiogenesis and biologic aggressiveness of rectal cancer: preliminary results. J Magn Reson Imaging 41:474–480CrossRef

36.

Surov A, Meyer HJ, Gawlitza M et al (2017) Correlations between DCE MRI and histopathological parameters in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Transl Oncol 10:17–21CrossRef

37.

Jansen JF, Carlson DL, Lu Y et al (2012) Correlation of a priori DCE-MRI and (1)H-MRS data with molecular markers in neck nodal metastases: initial analysis. Oral Oncol 48:717–722CrossRef

38.

Aryal MP, Nagaraja TN, Keenan KA et al (2014) Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI parameters and tumor cellularity in a rat model of cerebral glioma at 7 T. Magn Reson Med 71:2206–2214CrossRef

39.

Langer DL, van der Kwast TH, Evans AJ et al (2010) Prostate tissue composition and MR measurements: investigating the relationships between ADC, T2, K(trans), v(e), and corresponding histologic features. Radiology 255:485–494CrossRef

40.

Mills SJ, Soh C, Rose CJ et al (2010) Candidate biomarkers of extravascular extracellular space: a direct comparison of apparent diffusion coefficient and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging--derived measurement of the volume of the extravascular extracellular space in glioblastoma multiforme. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 31:549–553CrossRef

41.

Zhao F, Ahlawat S, Farahani SJ et al (2014) Can MR imaging be used to predict tumor grade in soft-tissue sarcoma? Radiology 272:192–201CrossRef

42.

Ahn S, Lee J, Cho MS, Park S, Sung SH (2018) Evaluation of Ki-67 index in core needle biopsies and matched breast cancer surgical specimens. Arch Pathol Lab Med 142:364–368CrossRef

Titel: Soft tissue sarcoma: DWI and DCE-MRI parameters correlate with Ki-67 labeling index
verfasst von: Ji Hyun Lee
Young Cheol Yoon
Sung Wook Seo
Yoon-La Choi
Hyun Su Kim
Publikationsdatum: 18.10.2019
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Radiology
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06445-9

Update Radiologie

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

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Soft tissue sarcoma: DWI and DCE-MRI parameters correlate with Ki-67 labeling index

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Darf man die Behandlung eines Neonazis ablehnen?

Ein Drittel der jungen Ärztinnen und Ärzte erwägt abzuwandern

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

Update Radiologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Darf man die Behandlung eines Neonazis ablehnen?

Ein Drittel der jungen Ärztinnen und Ärzte erwägt abzuwandern

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

Update Radiologie