Relationships between intratumoral heterogeneity parameters using diffusion, perfusion MRI, and FDG PET in head and neck cancer
Su Jin Lee1, Jin Wook Choi2, and Miran Han2

1Nuclear Medicine, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea, Republic of, 2Radiology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea, Republic of

Synopsis

MRI and PET can provide tumor biology information noninvasively. ADC from DWI can represent cellularity, DCE-MRI can provide microcirculation, and FDG PET can provide tumor metabolism. Intratumoral heterogeneity is often associated with adverse tumor biology and it can be assessed by these imaging parameters. Tumor heterogeneity on DWI can be simply evaluated by the difference between minimum and maximum ADC value. Metabolism to perfusion ratio can be calculated using DCE-MRI and FDG PET. Texture analysis of PET can be used to evaluate tumor heterogeneity. Thus we investigated the relationships between intraheterogeneity parameters derived from multimodality imaging.

Purpose

MRI and PET can provide tumor biology information noninvasively. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) from diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) can represent cellularity, dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) MRI can provide microcirculation, and fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET can provide tumor metabolism. Intratumoral heterogeneity is often associated with adverse tumor biology1,2 and it can be assessed by these imaging parameters. Thus, we investigated the relationships between intratumoral heterogeneity parameters derived from DWI, DCE MRI, and FDG PET in head and neck cancer.

Methods

Thirty patients who underwent DWI, DCE MRI, and FDG PET before treatment were retrospectively evaluated. We measured maximum and minimum ADC (ADCmax, ADCmin) values of primary tumor on DWI, Ktrans, Kep on DCE-MRI, and maximum, mean SUV, and peak SUL (lean body mass corrected SUV; SULp) on PET. For intratumoral heterogeneity evaluation, ADCdiff (ADCmax - ADCmin) was calculated on DWI MRI.3,4 We calculated metabolism-perfusion parameters (SUVs/Ktrans, SUVs/Kep) using DCE MRI and FDG PET.5 First-order statistics (skewness, kurtosis, entropy) and high-order features (low grey-level run emphasis, high grey-level run emphasis, low grey-level zone emphasis) were calculated using texture analysis of PET.6 The relationships among heterogeneity parameters of primary tumor were assessed.

Results

ADCdiff, an index of heterogeneity on DWI, was significantly correlated with metabolism-perfusion parameters (SUVmean/Ktrans: r=0.381, p = 0.038; SULp/Ktrans: r= 0.368, p = 0.457; SULp/Kep: r = 0.407, p = 0.026) using DCE and PET. ADCdiff was significantly correlated with entropy (r = 0.458, p = 0.011) and high grey-level run emphasis (r = 0.428, p = 0.018) on PET texture analysis. We divided the patients to 2 groups by median value of ADCdiff. In the tumor showing high ADCdiff, SUVmean/Ktrans (p = 0.027), SUVmean/Kep (p = 0.015), SULp/Ktrans (p = 0.050), SULp/Kep (p = 0.035) were significantly increased compared with the tumor showing low ADCdiff. The rate of tumor recurrence or disease progression was significantly higher in high ADCdiff group than that of low ADCdiff group (66.7% vs. 26.7%, p = 0.028).

Conclusions

Heterogeneous tumor on DWI showed metabolism-perfusion mismatch and poor prognosis in head and neck cancer. Tumor heterogeneity parameters derived from MRI and PET may provide valuable information on tumor biology and prediction of clinical outcome. A further study using a larger population of patients is needed to validate the clinical significance of intratumoral heterogeneity parameters derived from multimodality imaging.

Acknowledgements

No acknowledgement found.

References

1. Gerlinger M, Rowan AJ, Horswell S, et al. Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(10):883–892.

2. Van Allen EM, Wagle N, Stojanov P, et al. Whole-exome sequencing and clinical interpretation of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples to guide precision cancer medicine. Nat Med. 2014;20(6):682–688.

3. Mori N, Ota H, Mugikura S, et al. Detection of invasive components in cases of breast ductal carcinoma in situ on biopsy by using apparent diffusion coefficient MR parameters. Eur Radiol 2013:23(10):2705–2712.

4. Yoon HJ, Kim Y, Kim BS. Intratumoral metabolic heterogeneity predicts invasive components in breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Eur Radiol. 2015;25(12):3648-3658.

5. An YS, Kang DK, Jung YS, et al. Tumor metabolism and perfusion ratio assessed by 18F-FDG PET/CT and DCE-MRI in breast cancer patients: Correlation with tumor subtype and histologic prognostic factors. Eur J Radiol. 2015;84(7):1365-1370.

6. Yan J, Chu-Shern JL, Loi HY, et al. Impact of Image Reconstruction Settings on Texture Features in 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(11):1667-1673.



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
1339