Use of diffusion-weighted, intravoxel incoherent motion, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in the assessment of response to radiotherapy of lytic bone metastases from breast cancer

Academic Radiology

Volumn 21, Issue 10, 2014, Pages 1286-1293

  Gaeta, Michele ^a   Benedetto, Caterina ^a   Minutoli, Fabio ^a   D'Angelo, Tommaso ^a   Amato, Ernesto ^a   Mazziotti, Silvio ^a   Racchiusa, Santi ^a   Mormina, Enricomaria ^a   Blandino, Alfredo ^a   Pergolizzi, Stefano ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MESSINA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Bone metastases; DCE MRI; DW; IVIM; Radiotherapy

Indexed keywords

GADOLINIUM; MEDRONATE TECHNETIUM TC 99M; CONTRAST MEDIUM;

AGED; ARTICLE; BONE METASTASIS; BONE SCINTISCANNING; BREAST CANCER; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIFFUSION; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRAVOXEL INCOHERENT MOTION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; OSTEOLYSIS; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; TREATMENT RESPONSE; ALGORITHM; ARTIFACT; BONE NEOPLASMS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC USE; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MOTION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY; SECONDARY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; ARTIFACTS; BONE NEOPLASMS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MOTION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TECHNETIUM TC 99M MEDRONATE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84908243300     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: 18784046     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2014.05.021     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Coleman R.E. Clinical features of metastatic bone disease and risk of skeletal morbidity. Clin Cancer Res 2006, 12:6243s-6249s.
2. Hamaoka T., Madewell J.E., Podoloff D.A., et al. Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004, 22:2942-2953.
3. Hamaoka T., Costelloe C.M., Madewell J.E., et al. Tumour response interpretation with new tumour response criteria vs the World Health Organisation criteria in patients with bone-only metastatic breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2010, 102:651-657.
4. Bäuerle T., Semmler W. Imaging response to systemic therapy for bone metastases. Eur Radiol 2009, 19:2495-2507.
5. Lee K.C., Sud S., Meyer C.R., et al. An imaging biomarker of early treatment response in prostate cancer that has metastasized to the bone. Cancer Res 2007, 67:3524-3528.
6. Theilmann R.J., Borders R., Trouard T.P., et al. Changes in water mobility measured by diffusion MRI predict response of metastatic breast cancer to chemotherapy. Neoplasia 2004, 6:831-837.
7. Lee K.C., Bradley D.A., Hussain M., et al. A feasibility study evaluating the functional diffusion map as a predictive imaging biomarker for detection of treatment response in a patient with metastatic prostate cancer to the bone. Neoplasia 2007, 9:1003-1011.
8. O'Connor J.P., Jackson A., Parker G.J., et al. DCE-MRI biomarkers in the clinical evaluation of antiangiogenic and vascular disrupting agents. Br JCancer 2007, 96:189-195.
9. Evelhoch J.L. Key factors in the acquisition of contrast kinetic data for oncology. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999, 10:254-259.
10. Li S.P., Padhani A.R., Makris A. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and blood oxygenation level-dependent magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of changes in tumor biology with treatment. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2011, 43:103-107.
11. Le Bihan D., Breton E., Lallemand D., et al. MR imaging of intra-voxel incoherent motions: application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders. Radiology 1986, 161:401-407.
12. Le Bihan D., Breton E., Lallemand D., et al. Separation of diffusion and perfusion in intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging. Radiology 1988, 168:497-505.
13. Le Bihan D. Intravoxel incoherent motion perfusion MR imaging: a wake-up call. Radiology 2008, 249:748-752.
14. Mc Cormack H.M., Horne D.J., Sheather S. Clinical applications of visual analogue scales: a critical review. Psychol Med 1988, 18:1007-1019.
15. Koh D.M., Collins D.J., Orton M.R. Intravoxel incoherent motion in body diffusion-weighted MRI: reality and challenges. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011, 196:1351-1361.
16. Saip P., Tenekeci N., Aydiner A., et al. Response evaluation of bone metastases in breast cancer: value of magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer Invest 1999, 17:575-580.
17. Brown A.L., Middleton G., MacVicar A.D., et al. T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer vertebral metastases: changes on treatment and correlation with response to therapy. Clin Radiol 1998, 53:493-501.
18. Luciani A., Vignaud A., Cavet M., et al. Liver cirrhosis: intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging-pilot study. Radiology 2008, 249:891-899.
19. Gao Q., Srinivasan G., Magin R.L., et al. Anomalous diffusion measured by a twice-refocused spin echo pulse sequence: analysis using fractional order calculus. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011, 33:1177-1183.
20. Landis J.R., Koch G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33:159-174.
21. Tabachnick B.G., Fidell L.S. Using multivariate statistics 1996, Harper Collins, New York. 3rd ed.
22. Maisano R., Pergolizzi S., Cascino S. Novel therapeutic approaches to cancer patients with bone metastasis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2001, 40:239-250.
23. Thoeny H.C., Ross B.D. Predicting and monitoring cancer treatment response with diffusion-weighted MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010, 32:2-16.
24. Li S.P., Padhani A.R. Tumor response assessments with diffusion and perfusion MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012, 35:745-763.
25. Dzik-Jurasz A., Domenig C., George M., et al. Diffusion MRI for prediction of response of rectal cancer to chemoradiation. Lancet 2002, 360:307-308.
26. Sakuma H., Tamagawa Y., Kimura H., et al. Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) imaging using an experimental MR unit with small bore (in Japanese). Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1989, 49:941-943.
27. Sun X., Wang H., Chen F., et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI of hepatic tumor in rats: comparison between invivo and postmortem imaging acquisitions. JMagn Reson Imaging 2009, 29:621-628.
28. Lewin M., Fartoux L., Vignaud A., et al. The diffusion-weighted imaging perfusion fraction f is a potential marker of sorafenib treatment in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a pilot study. Eur Radiol 2011, 21:281-290.
29. De Souza N.M., Riches S.F., Vanas N.J., et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: a potential non-invasive marker of tumour aggressiveness in localized prostate cancer. Clin Radiol 2008, 63:774-782.
30. Tofts P.S., Brix G., Buckley D.L., et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T (1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999, 10:223-232.
31. Collins D.J., Padhani A.R. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of tumor perfusion. Approaches and biomedical challenges. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 2004, 23:65-83.
32. Wang H., Li J., Chen F., et al. Morphological, functional and metabolic imaging biomarkers: assessment of vascular-disrupting effect on rodent liver tumours. Eur Radiol 2010, 20:2013-2026.
33. Wirestam R., Borg M., Brockstedt S., et al. Perfusion-related parameters in intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging compared with CBV and CBF measured by dynamic susceptibility-contrast MR technique. Acta Radiol 2001, 42:123-128.
34. Powers T.A., Lorenz C.H., Holburn G.E., et al. Renal artery stenosis: invivo perfusion MR imaging. Radiology 1991, 178:543-548.
35. Henkelman R.M. Does IVIM measure classical perfusion?. Magn Reson Med 1990, 16:470-475.
36. Padhani A.R., Gogbashian A. Bony metastases: assessing response to therapy with whole-body diffusion MRI. Cancer Imaging 2011, 11:129-145.
37. Schmidt G.P., Reiser M.F., Baur-Melnyk A. Whole-body MRI for the staging and follow-up of patients with metastasis. Eur J Radiol 2009, 70:393-400.
38. Fenchel M., Konaktchieva M., Weisel K., et al. Response assessment in patients with multiple myeloma during antiangiogenetic therapy using arterial spin labeling and diffusion-weighted imaging: a feasibility study. Acad Radiol 2010, 17:1326-1333.
39. Vanel D., Casadei R., Alberghini M., et al. MR imaging of bone metastases and choice of sequence: spin echo, in-phase gradient echo, diffusion, and contrast medium. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2009, 13:97-103.
40. Biffar A., Dietrich O., Sourbron S., et al. Diffusion and perfusion imaging of bone marrow. Eur J Radiol 2010, 76:323-328.
41. Costelloe C.M., Chuang H.H., Madewell J.E., et al. Cancer response criteria and bone metastases: RECIST 1.1, MDA and PERCIST. J Cancer 2010, 1:80-92.
42. Stafford S.E., Gralow J.R., Schubert E.K., et al. Use of serial FDG PET to measure the response of bone-dominant breast cancer to therapy. Acad Radiol 2002, 9:913-921.
43. Larcombe-McDouall J.B., Mattiello J., McCoy C.L., et al. Size dependence of regional blood flow in murine tumours using deuterium magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Radiat Biol 1991, 60:109-113.
44. He ZQ, Evelhoch JL. Analysis of dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in tumours: relationship of derived parameters with physiological factors. Proceedings of the 6th annual meeting of the international society of magnetic resonance, Sydney, 1652 Berkeley, CA: ISMRM,1998.
45. Leach M.O., Brindle K.M., Evelhoch J.L., et al. The assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapies in early-stage clinical trials using magnetic resonance imaging: issues and recommendations. Br J Cancer 2005, 92:1599-1610.