Korean Journal of Radiology

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Monitoring Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy of Primary Osteosarcoma Using Diffusion Kurtosis Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Initial Findings

  • Chenglei Liu (Department of Radiology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital) ;
  • Yan Xi (Department of Radiology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital) ;
  • Mei Li (Department of Radiology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital) ;
  • Qiong Jiao (Department of Pathology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital) ;
  • Huizhen Zhang (Department of Pathology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital) ;
  • Qingcheng Yang (Department of Orthopedics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital) ;
  • Weiwu Yao (Department of Radiology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital)
  • Received : 2018.07.17
  • Accepted : 2018.11.11
  • Published : 2019.05.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) is effective in monitoring tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with osteosarcoma. Materials and Methods: Twenty-nine osteosarcoma patients (20 men and 9 women; mean age, 17.6 ± 7.8 years) who had undergone magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and DKI before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy were included. Tumor volume, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), mean diffusivity (MD), mean kurtosis (MK), and change ratio (ΔX) between pre-and post-treatment were calculated. Based on histologic response, the patients were divided into those with good response (≥ 90% necrosis, n = 12) and those with poor response (< 90% necrosis, n = 17). Several MRI parameters between the groups were compared using Student's t test. The correlation between image indexes and tumor necrosis was determined using Pearson's correlation, and diagnostic performance was compared using receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: In good responders, MDpost, ADCpost, and MKpost values were significantly higher than in poor responders (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p = 0.042, respectively). The ΔMD and ΔADC were also significantly higher in good responders than in poor responders (p < 0.001 and p = 0.01, respectively). However, no significant difference was observed in ΔMK (p = 0.092). MDpost and ΔMD showed high correlations with tumor necrosis rate (r = 0.669 and r = 0.622, respectively), and MDpost had higher diagnostic performance than ADCpost (p = 0.037) and MKpost (p = 0.011). Similarly, ΔMD also showed higher diagnostic performance than ΔADC (p = 0.033) and ΔMK (p = 0.037). Conclusion: MD is a promising biomarker for monitoring tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy in patients with osteosarcoma.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The manuscript had been edited by American Journal Experts.

References

  1. de Baere T, Vanel D, Shapeero LG, Charpentier A, Terrier P, di Paola M. Osteosarcoma after chemotherapy: evaluation with contrast material-enhanced subtraction MR imaging. Radiology 1992;185:587-592 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.185.2.1410378
  2. Bielack SS, Hecker-Nolting S, Blattmann C, Kager L. Advances in the management of osteosarcoma. F1000Res 2016;5:2767
  3. Davis AM, Bell RS, Goodwin PJ. Prognostic factors in osteosarcoma: a critical review. J Clin Oncol 1994;12:423-431 https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1994.12.2.423
  4. Denecke T, Hundsdorfer P, Misch D, Steffen IG, Schonberger S, Furth C, et al. Assessment of histological response of paediatric bone sarcomas using FDG PET in comparison to morphological volume measurement and standardized MRI parameters. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;37:1842-1853 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-010-1484-3
  5. Kubo T, Furuta T, Johan MP, Adachi N, Ochi M. Percent slope analysis of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging for assessment of chemotherapy response of osteosarcoma or Ewing sarcoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Skeletal Radiol 2016;45:1235-1242 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-016-2410-y
  6. Brisse H, Ollivier L, Edeline V, Pacquement H, Michon J, Glorion C, et al. Imaging of malignant tumours of the long bones in children: monitoring response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and preoperative assessment. Pediatr Radiol 2004;34:595-605 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-004-1192-x
  7. Wakabayashi H, Saito J, Taki J, Hashimoto N, Tsuchiya H, Gabata T, et al. Triple-phase contrast-enhanced MRI for the prediction of preoperative chemotherapeutic effect in patients with osteosarcoma: comparison with (99m)Tc-MIBI scintigraphy. Skeletal Radiol 2016;45:87-95 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-015-2250-1
  8. Lang P, Wendland MF, Saeed M, Gindele A, Rosenau W, Mathur A, et al. Osteogenic sarcoma: noninvasive in vivo assessment of tumor necrosis with diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 1998;206:227-235 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.206.1.9423677
  9. Wang CS, Du LJ, Si MJ, Yin QH, Chen L, Shu M, et al. Noninvasive assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in osteosarcoma of long bones with diffusion-weighted imaging: an initial in vivo study. PLoS One 2013;8:e72679
  10. Byun BH, Kong CB, Lim I, Choi CW, Song WS, Cho WH, et al. 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 https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.112.115964
  11. Baunin C, Schmidt G, Baumstarck K, Bouvier C, Gentet JC, Aschero A, et al. 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 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-012-1360-2
  12. Bajpai J, Gamnagatti S, Kumar R, Sreenivas V, Sharma MC, Khan SA, et al. Role of MRI in osteosarcoma for evaluation and prediction of chemotherapy response: correlation with histological necrosis. Pediatr Radiol 2011;41:441-450 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-010-1876-3
  13. Oka K, Yakushiji T, Sato H, Hirai T, Yamashita Y, Mizuta H. The value of diffusion-weighted imaging for monitoring the chemotherapeutic response of osteosarcoma: a comparison between average apparent diffusion coefficient and minimum apparent diffusion coefficient. Skeletal Radiol 2010;39:141-146 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-009-0830-7
  14. Hayashida Y, Yakushiji T, Awai K, Katahira K, Nakayama Y, Shimomura O, et al. Monitoring therapeutic responses of primary bone tumors by diffusion-weighted image: initial results. Eur Radiol 2006;16:2637-2643 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0342-y
  15. Yu J, Xu Q, Song JC, Li Y, Dai X, Huang DY, et al. The value of diffusion kurtosis magnetic resonance imaging for assessing treatment response of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. Eur Radiol 2017;27:1848-1857 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4529-6
  16. Wang D, Li YH, Fu J, Wang H. Diffusion kurtosis imaging study on temporal lobe after nasopharyngeal carcinoma radiotherapy. Brain Res 2016;1648:387-393 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2016.07.041
  17. Zhu L, Pan Z, Ma Q, Yang W, Shi H, Fu C, et al. Diffusion kurtosis imaging study of rectal adenocarcinoma associated with histopathologic prognostic factors: preliminary findings. Radiology 2017;284:66-76 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016160094
  18. Bieling P, Rehan N, Winkler P, Helmke K, Maas R, Fuchs N, et al. Tumor size and prognosis in aggressively treated osteosarcoma. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:848-858 https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1996.14.3.848
  19. Rosen G, Caparros B, Huvos AG, Kosloff C, Nirenberg A, Cacavio A, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy for osteogenic sarcoma: selection of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy based on the response of the primary tumor to preoperative chemotherapy. Cancer 1982;49:1221-1230 https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19820315)49:6<1221::AID-CNCR2820490625>3.0.CO;2-E
  20. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988;44:837-845 https://doi.org/10.2307/2531595
  21. Uhl M, Saueressig U, Koehler G, Kontny U, Niemeyer C, Reichardt W, et al. Evaluation of tumour necrosis during chemotherapy with diffusion-weighted MR imaging: preliminary results in osteosarcomas. Pediatr Radiol 2006;36:1306-1311 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-006-0324-x
  22. Rosenkrantz AB, Padhani AR, Chenevert TL, Koh DM, De Keyzer F, Taouli B, et al. Body diffusion kurtosis imaging: basic principles, applications, and considerations for clinical practice. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015;42:1190-1202 https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24985
  23. Le Bihan D. The 'wet mind': water and functional neuroimaging. Phys Med Biol 2007;52:R57-R90 https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/52/7/R02
  24. Jensen JH, Helpern JA, Ramani A, Lu H, Kaczynski K. Diffusional kurtosis imaging: the quantification of non-Gaussian water diffusion by means of magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med 2005;53:1432-1440 https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.20508
  25. Jensen JH, Helpern JA. MRI quantification of non-Gaussian water diffusion by kurtosis analysis. NMR Biomed 2010;23:698-710 https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.1518
  26. Pan G, Raymond AK, Carrasco CH, Wallace S, Kim EE, Shirkhoda A, et al. Osteosarcoma: MR imaging after preoperative chemotherapy. Radiology 1990;174:517-526 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.174.2.2296660
  27. Subhawong TK, Jacobs MA, Fayad LM. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging for characterizing musculoskeletal lesions. Radiographics 2014;34:1163-1177 https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.345140190