Abstract
Purpose
Determine interobserver concordance of semiautomated three-dimensional volumetric
and two-dimensional manual measurements of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values
in soft tissue masses (STMs) and explore standard deviation (SD) as a measure of tumor
ADC heterogeneity.
Results
Concordance correlation coefficients for mean ADC increased with more extensive sampling.
Agreement on the SD of tumor ADC values was better for large regions of interest and
multislice methods. Correlation between mean and SD ADC was low, suggesting that these
parameters are relatively independent.
Conclusion
Mean ADC of STMs can be determined by volumetric quantification with high interobserver
agreement. STM heterogeneity merits further investigation as a potential imaging biomarker
that complements other functional magnetic resonance imaging parameters.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Clinical ImagingAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Diffusion-weighted MR imaging for characterizing musculoskeletal lesions.Radiographics. 2014; 34: 1163-1177
- Detection of soft-tissue sarcoma recurrence: added value of functional MR imaging techniques at 3.0 T.Radiology. 2014; 271: 499-511
- Musculoskeletal tumors: how to use anatomic, functional, and metabolic mr techniques.Radiology. 2012; 265: 340-356
- Evaluation of tumour necrosis during chemotherapy with diffusion-weighted MR imaging: preliminary results in osteosarcomas.Pediatr Radiol. 2006; 36: 1306-1311
- Monitoring chemotherapeutic response in RIF-1 tumors by single-quantum and triple-quantum-filtered (23)Na MRI, (1)H diffusion-weighted MRI and PET imaging.Magn Reson Imaging. 2007; 25: 1015-1023
- Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging allows monitoring of anticancer treatment effects in patients with soft-tissue sarcomas.J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008; 27: 1109-1113
- Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in non-invasive monitoring of antiangiogenic therapy in experimental tumor model.Exp Oncol. 2010; 32: 104-106
- Value of diffusion-weighted images in differentiating mid-course responders to chemotherapy for osteosarcoma compared to the histological response: preliminary results.Skeletal Radiol. 2012; 41: 1141-1149
- Combination of 18F-FDG PET/CT and diffusion-weighted MR imaging as a predictor of histologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: preliminary results in osteosarcoma.J Nucl Med. 2013; 54: 1053-1059
- Role of diffusion-weighted MRI in differentiation of masticator space malignancy from infection.Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013; 42: 20120183
- Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in neck lymph adenopathy.Cancer Imaging. 2008; 8: 173-180
- Soft-tissue tumors evaluated by line-scan diffusion-weighted imaging: influence of myxoid matrix on the apparent diffusion coefficient.J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007; 25: 1199-1204
- Characterization of soft tissue masses: can quantitative diffusion weighted imaging reliably distinguish cysts from solid masses?.Skeletal Radiol. 2013; 42: 1583-1592
- Apparent diffusion coefficient measurement by diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging is a useful tool in differentiating renal tumors.BMC Cancer. 2015; https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-015-1221-1
- Differentiation of benign and malignant lesions of the tongue by using diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 T.Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015; 31: 20140325
- Differentiation of benign and malignant skeletal lesions with quantitative diffusion weighted MRI at 3 T.Eur J Radiol. 2015; 84: 1091-1097
- Differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast tumors using apparent diffusion coefficient value measured through diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging.J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2015; 39: 513-522
- Diffusion-weighted MRI in the differential diagnosis of uterine endometrial cavity tumors.Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2015; 127: 266-273
- New opportunities, MRI biomarkers in the evaluation of head and neck cancer.Magy Onkol. 2014; 58: 269-280
- Role of apparent diffusion coefficients with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in differentiating between benign and malignant bone tumors.World J Surg Oncol. 2014; 12: 365
- Intratumoral heterogeneity of breast cancer xenograft models: texture analysis of diffusion-weighted MR imaging.Korean J Radiol. 2014; 15: 591-604
- Can volumetric ADC measurement help predict response to Y90 radioembolization in HCC?.Abdom Imaging. 2015; 40: 1471-1480
- A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility.Biometrics. 1989; 45: 255-268
- Interobserver variability of selective region-of-interest measurement protocols for quantitative diffusion weighted imaging in soft tissue masses: comparison with whole tumor volume measurements.J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015; https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24994
- Improving tumour heterogeneity MRI assessment with histograms.Br J Cancer. 2014; 111: 2205-2213
- ADC histograms predict response to anti-angiogenic therapy in patients with recurrent high-grade glioma.Neuroradiology. 2011; 53: 291-302
- Spatial heterogeneity in sarcoma 18F-FDG uptake as a predictor of patient outcome.J Nucl Med. 2008; 49: 1973-1979
- Heterogeneity in DCE-MRI parametric maps: a biomarker for treatment response?.Phys Med Biol. 2011; 56: 1601-1616
- Fractal analysis in radiological and nuclear medicine perfusion imaging: a systematic review.Eur Radiol. 2014; 24: 60-69
- Quantifying heterogeneity in human tumours using MRI and PET.Eur J Cancer. 2012; 48: 447-455
Article info
Publication history
Published online: November 30, 2015
Accepted:
November 5,
2015
Received in revised form:
October 31,
2015
Received:
August 13,
2015
Identification
Copyright
© 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
