Soft-tissue tumors: Value of static and dynamic gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MR imaging in prediction of malignancy

Radiology

Volumn 233, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 493-502

  Van Rijswijk, Catharine S P ^a   Geirnaerdt, Maarje J A ^b   Hogendoorn, Pancras C W ^a   Taminiau, Antonie H M ^a   Van Coevorden, Frits ^b   Zwinderman, Aeilko H ^a   Pope, Thomas L ^c   Bloem, Johan L ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b NETHERLANDS CANCER INSTITUTE   (Netherlands)

^c MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Magnetic resonance (MR), contrast enhancement; Neoplasms, MR, 40.1214, 40.121415, 40.12143; Sarcoma, 40.37; Soft tissues, neoplasms, 40.36, 40.37

Indexed keywords

GADOLINIUM PENTETATE MEGLUMINE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BENIGN TUMOR; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CHILD; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; INFANT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MULTIVARIATE LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; NEEDLE BIOPSY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PARAMETER; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SOFT TISSUE TUMOR; TUMOR VOLUME;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; INFANT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; ROC CURVE; SOFT TISSUE NEOPLASMS;

EID: 7044271123     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2332031110     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Parker SL, Tong T, Bolden S, Wingo PA. Cancer statistics, 1996. CA Cancer J Clin 1996; 46:5-27.
2. Fletcher CD, Unni KK, Mertens F, eds. World Health Organization classification of tumours. Pathology and genetics of tumours of soft tissue and bone. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2002.
3. Kransdorf MJ. Benign soft-tissue tumors in a large referral population: distribution of specific diagnoses by age, sex, and location. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995; 164:395-402.
4. van Glabbeke M, van Oosterom AT, Oosterhuis JW, et al. Prognostic factors for the outcome of chemotherapy in advanced soft tissue sarcoma: an analysis of 2,185 patients treated with anthracycline-containing first-line regimens - a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group Study. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17:150-157.
5. Patel SR, Vadhan-Raj S, Burgess MA, et al. Results of two consecutive trials of dose-intensive chemotherapy with doxorubicin and ifosfamide in patients with sarcomas. Am J Clin Oncol 1998; 21:317-321.
6. Chang AE, Matory YL, Dwyer AJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging versus computed tomography in the evaluation of soft tissue tumors of the extremities. Ann Surg 1987; 205:340-348.
7. Sundaram M, McGuire MH, Herbold DR. Magnetic resonance imaging of soft tissue masses: an evaluation of fifty-three histologically proven tumors. Magn Reson Imaging 1988; 6:237-248.
8. Totty WG, Murphy WA, Lee JK. Soft-tissue tumors: MR imaging. Radiology 1986; 160:135-141.
9. Rubin DA, Kneeland JB. MR imaging of the musculoskeletal system: technical considerations for enhancing image quality and diagnostic yield. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 163:1155-1163.
10. Kransdorf MJ, Jelinek JS, Moser RP Jr, et al. Soft-tissue masses: diagnosis using MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1989; 153:541-547.
11. Berquist TH, Ehman RL, King BF, Hodgman CG, Ilstrup DM. Value of MR imaging in differentiating benign from malignant soft-tissue masses: study of 95 lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990; 155:1251-1255.
12. Crim JR, Seeger LL, Yao L, Chandnani V, Eckardt JJ. Diagnosis of soft-tissue masses with MR imaging: can benign masses be differentiated from malignant ones? Radiology 1992; 185:581-586.
13. Petasnick JP, Turner DA, Charters JR, Gitelis S, Zacharias CE. Soft-tissue masses of the locomotor system: comparison of MR imaging with CT. Radiology 1986; 160:125-133.
14. Moulton JS, Blebea JS, Dunco DM, Braley SE, Bisset GS 3rd, Emery KH. MR imaging of soft-tissue masses: diagnostic efficacy and value of distinguishing between benign and malignant lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995; 164:1191-1199.
15. Kransdorf MJ, Murphey MD. Radiologic evaluation of soft-tissue masses: a current perspective. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175:575-587.
16. Beltran J, Chandnani V, McGhee RA Jr, Kursunoglu-Brahme S. Gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MR imaging of the musculoskeletal system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991; 156:457-466.
17. Benedikt RA, Jelinek JS, Kransdorf MJ, Moser RP, Berrey BH. MR imaging of soft-tissue masses: role of gadopentetate dimeglumine. J Magn Reson Imaging 1994; 4:485-490.
18. De Schepper AM, Ramon FA, Degryse HR. Statistical analysis of MRI parameters predicting malignancy in 141 soft tissue masses. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 1992; 156:587-591.
19. Herrlin K, Ling LB, Pettersson H, Willen H, Rydholm A. Gadolinium-DTPA enhancement of soft tissue tumors in magnetic resonance imaging. Acta Radiol 1990; 31:233-236.
20. May DA, Good RB, Smith DK, Parsons TW. MR imaging of musculoskeletal tumors and tumor mimickers with intravenous gadolinium: experience with 242 patients. Skeletal Radiol 1997; 26:2-15.
21. Pettersson H, Eliasson J, Egund N, et al. Gadolinium-DTPA enhancement of soft tissue tumors in magnetic resonance imaging: preliminary clinical experience in five patients. Skeletal Radiol 1988; 17:319-323.
22. Rosenthal RE, Wozney P. Diagnostic value of gadopentetate dimeglumine for 1.5-T MR imaging of musculoskeletal masses: comparison with unenhanced T1- and T2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1991; 1:547-551.
23. Erlemann R, Reiser MF, Peters PE, et al. Musculoskeletal neoplasms: static and dynamic Gd-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1989; 171:767-773.
24. Ma LD, Frassica FJ, McCarthy EF, Bluemke DA, Zerhouni EA. Benign and malignant musculoskeletal masses: MR imaging differentiation with rim-to-center differential enhancement ratios. Radiology 1997; 202:739-744.
25. van der Woude HJ, Verstraete KL, Hogendoorn PC, Taminiau AH, Hermans J, Bloem JL. Musculoskeletal tumors: does fast dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging contribute to the characterization? Radiology 1998; 208:821-828.
26. Verstraete KL, De Deene Y, Roels H, Dierick A, Uyttendaele D, Kunnen M. Benign and malignant musculoskeletal lesions: dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging - parametric "first-pass" images depict tissue vascularization and perfusion. Radiology 1994; 192:835-843.
27. Verstraete KL, Dierick A, De Deene Y, et al. First-pass images of musculoskeletal lesions: a new and useful diagnostic application of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 1994; 12:687-702.
28. Fletcher BD, Hanna SL. Musculoskeletal neoplasms: dynamic Gd-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1990; 177:287-288.
29. Beltran J, Simon DC, Katz W, Weis LD. Increased MR signal intensity in skeletal muscle adjacent to malignant tumors: pathologic correlation and clinical relevance. Radiology 1987; 162:251-255.
30. Panicek DM, Go SD, Healey JH, Leung DH, Brennan MF, Lewis JJ. Soft-tissue sarcoma involving bone or neurovascular structures: MR imaging prognostic factors. Radiology 1997; 205:871-875.
31. Verstraete KL, Achten E, Dierick A. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of musculoskeletal neoplasms: different types and slopes of time-intensity curves (abstr). In: Book of abstracts: Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 1992. Berkeley, Calif: Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 1992; 2609.
32. Lemeshow S, Hosmer DW Jr. A review of goodness of fit statistics for use in the development of logistic regression models. Am J Epidemiol 1982; 115:92-106.
33. Metz CE. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 1978; 8:283-298.
34. van Erkel AR, Pattynama PM. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis: basic principles and applications in radiology. Eur J Radiol 1998; 27:88-94.
35. Verstraete KL, Vanzieleghem B, De Deene Y, et al. Static, dynamic and first-pass MR imaging of musculoskeletal lesions using gadodiamide injection. Acta Radiol 1995; 36:27-36.
36. Enzinger FM, Weiss SW. Soft tissue tumors. St Louis, Mo: Mosby, 1995.
37. Heslin MJ, Lewis JJ, Woodruff JM, Brennan MF. Core needle biopsy for diagnosis of extremity soft tissue sarcoma. Ann Surg Oncol 1997; 4:425-431.
38. Barth RJ Jr, Merino MJ, Solomon D, Yang JC, Baker AR. A prospective study of the value of core needle biopsy and fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of soft tissue masses. Surgery 1992; 112:536-543.
39. De Schepper AM, De Beuckeleer L, Vandevenne J, Somville J. Magnetic resonance imaging of soft tissue tumors. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:213-223.
40. Shapeero LG, Vanel D, Verstraete KL, Bloem JL. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging for soft tissue sarcomas. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 1999; 3:101-114.
41. Ma LD, McCarthy EF, Bluemke DA, Frassica FJ. Differentiation of benign from malignant musculoskeletal lesions using MR imaging: pitfalls in MR evaluation of lesions with a cystic appearance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170:1251-1258.
42. van Rijswijk CS, Hogendoorn PC, Taminiau AH, Bloem JL. Synovial sarcoma: dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging features. Skeletal Radiol 2001; 30:25-30.