Research Article

A multiparametric analysis combining DCE-MRI- and IVIM -derived parameters to improve differentiation of parotid tumors: a pilot study

*Author for correspondence:

E-mail Address: battellina@gmail.com

Postgraduation School of Radiodiagnostic of Milan, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Giuseppe Franceschelli

Diagnostic & Interventional Radiology Service, San Paolo Hospital, Milan, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Mario Petrillo

Diagnostic & Interventional Radiology Service, San Paolo Hospital, Milan, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Mario Sansone

Department of Electrical Engineering & Information Technologies, University “Federico II” of Naples, Via Claudio, Naples, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Roberta Fusco

Radiology Unit, “Dipartimento di supporto ai percorsi oncologici Area Diagnostica, Istituto Nazionale Tumori – IRCCS – Fondazione G Pascale”, Via Mariano Semmola, Naples, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Filippo Pesapane

Postgraduation School of Radiodiagnostic of Milan, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Giovanni Pompili

Diagnostic & Interventional Radiology Service, San Paolo Hospital, Milan, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Anna Maria Ierardi

Diagnostic & Interventional Radiology Service, San Paolo Hospital, Milan, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Alberto Maria Saibene

Otolaryngology Unit, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, Department of Health Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Laura Moneghini

Department of Health Sciences, Division of Pathology, University of Milan, AO Santi Paolo e Carlo, 20142 Milan, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Federico Biglioli

Maxillofacial Surgery Unit, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Gianpaolo Carrafiello

Diagnostic & Interventional Radiology Service, San Paolo Hospital, Milan, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:9 Feb 2018https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2017-0655

View article

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI and diffusion weighted (DW)-MRI diagnostic value to differentiate Warthin tumors (WT) by pleomorphic adenomas (PA). Materials & methods: Seven WT and seven PA were examined. DCE- and DW-MRI parameters were extracted from volumes of interest; volume of interest-based averages and standard deviations were calculated. Statistical analysis included: linear discriminant analysis, receiver operating characteristic curves, sensitivity and specificity. Results: No single feature was able to differentiate WT by PA (p > 0.05); linear discriminant analysis analysis showed that a combination of all features or combinations of feature pairs (namely: K^trans(std) & f(std), K^trans(std) & D(std), k_ep(std) & D(std), MRE(av) & TTP(av)) might achieve sensitivity (SENS), specificity (SPEC) = 100%, with a slight reduction after cross-validation analysis (SENS = 0.875; SPEC = 1). Conclusion: Although preliminary and not conclusive, our results suggest that differentiation between WT and PA is possible through a multiparametric approach based on combination of DCE- and DW-MRI parameters.

Keywords:

References

1 Barnes L, Eveson JW, Reichart P, Sidransky D. World Health Organization classification of tumors – pathology and genetics of head and neck tumors. IARC (2005). www.iarc.fr/en/publications/pdfs-online/pat-gen/bb9/BB9.pdf.
Google Scholar
2 Gao M, Hao Y, Huang MX et al. Salivary gland tumors in a northern Chinese population: a 50-year retrospective study of 7190 cases. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 46(3), 343–349 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
3 Aparecida De Oliveira F, Barroso Duarte EC, Taveira TC et al. Salivary gland tumor: a review of 599 cases in a Brazilian population. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2811571/pdf/12105_2009_Article_139.pdf.
Google Scholar
4 Lukšić I, Virag M, Manojlović S et al. Salivary gland tumors: 25 years of experience from a single institution in Croatia. J. Craniomaxillofac. Surg. 40(3), e75–e81 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
5 Som PM, Curtin HD. Head and Neck Imaging (4th Edition). Mosby, MI, USA (2000).https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=QHA7Fah1HEIC.
Google Scholar
6 Di Palma S. Carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma, with particular emphasis on early lesions. Head Neck Pathol. 7(Suppl. 1), S68–S76 (2013).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
7 Witt RL, Eisele DW, Morton RP, Nicolai P, Vander Poorten V, Zbären P. Etiology and management of recurrent parotid pleomorphic adenoma. Laryngoscope 125(4), 888–893 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
8 Bradley PT, Paleri V, Homer JJ. Consensus statement by otolaryngologists on the diagnosis and management of benign parotid gland disease. Clin. Otolaryngol. 37(4), 300–304 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
9 Bozzetti A, Biglioli F, Salvato G, Brusati R. Technical refinements in surgical treatment of benign parotid tumors. J. Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg. 27(5), 289–293 (1999).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
10 Riad MA, Abdel-Rahman H, Ezzat WF, Adly A, Dessouky O, Shehata M. Variables related to recurrence of pleomorphic adenomas: outcome of parotid surgery in 182 cases. Laryngoscope 121(7), 1467–1472 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
11 Wang H, Fundakowski C, Khurana JS, Jhala N. Fine-needle aspiration biopsy of salivary gland lesions. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 139(12), 1491–1497 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
12 Abouyared M, Fundakowski C, Casta J et al. The role of indeterminate fine-needle biopsy in the diagnosis of parotid malignancy. Laryngoscope 124(3), 678–681 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
13 Yabuuchi H, Matsuo Y, Kamitani T et al. Parotid gland tumors: can addition of diffusion-weighted MRI to dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI improve diagnostic accuracy in characterization? Radiology 249(3), 909–916 (2008).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
14 Yabuuchi H, Fukuya T, Tajima T, Hachitanda Y, Tomita K, Koga M. Salivary gland tumors: diagnostic value of gadolinium-enhanced dynamic MRI with histopathologic correlation. Radiology 226, 345–354 (2003).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
15 Espinoza S, Halimi P. Interpretation pearls for MRI of parotid gland tumor. Eur. Ann. Otorhinolaryngol. Head Neck Dis. 130(1), 30–35 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
16 Mikaszewski B, Markiet K, Smugała A, Stodulski D, Szurowska E, Stankiewicz C. Diffusion- and perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging – an alternative to fine needle biopsy or only an adjunct test in preoperative differential diagnostics of malignant and benign parotid tumors? J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 75(10), 2248–2253 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
17 Tofts P. T1-weighted DCE imaging concepts: modelling, acquisition and analysis. www.paul-tofts-phd.org.uk/DCE-MRI_siemens.pdf.
Google Scholar
18 Le Bihan D. Apparent diffusion coefficient and beyond: what diffusion MRI can tell us about tissue structure. Radiology 268(2), 318–322 (2013).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
19 Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, Aubin ML, Vignaud J, Laval-Jeantet M. Separation of diffusion and perfusion in intravoxel incoherent motion MRI. Radiology 168(2), 497–505 (1988).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
20 Iima M, Le Bihan D. Clinical intravoxel incoherent motion and diffusion MRI: past, present and future. Radiology 278(1), 13–32 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
21 Kato H, Fujimoto K, Matsuo M, Mizuta K, Aoki M. Usefulness of diffusion-weighted MRI for differentiating between Warthin's tumor and oncocytoma of the parotid gland. Jpn J. Radiol. 35(2), 78–85 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
22 Abdel Razek AAK, Samir S, Ashmalla GA. Characterization of parotid tumors with dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion-weighted MRI. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 41(1), 131–136 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
23 Sumi M, Nakamura T. Head and neck tumors: combined MRI assessment based on IVIM and TIC analyses for the differentiation of tumors of different histological types. Eur. Radiol. 24(1), 223–231 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
24 Tofts PS. Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 7(1), 91–101 (1997).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
25 Brix G, Semmler W, Port R, Schad LR, Layer G, Lorenz WJ. Pharmacokinetic parameters in CNS Gd-DTPA enhanced MRI. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 15(4), 621–628 (1991).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
26 Weinmann HJ, Laniado M, Mützel W. Pharmacokinetics of GdDTPA/dimeglumine after intravenous injection into healthy volunteers. Physiol. Chem. Phys. Med. NMR 16(2), 167–172 (1984).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
27 Schabel MC, Morrell GR, Oh KY, Walczak CA, Barlow RB, Neumayer LA. Pharmacokinetic mapping for lesion classification in dynamic breast MRI. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 31(6), 1371–1378 (2010).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
28 Fusco R, Petrillo A, Petrillo M, Sansone M. Use of tracer kinetic models for selection of semiquantitative features for DCE-MRI data classification. Appl. Magn. Reson. 44(11), 1311–1324 (2013).
CASGoogle Scholar
29 Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, Grenier P, Cabanis E, Laval-Jeantet M. MRI of intravoxel incoherent motions: application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders. Radiology 161(2), 401–407 (1986).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
30 Vignaud A, Cavet M. Liver cirrhosis: intravoxel incoherent motion MRI – pilot purpose: methods: results: conclusion. Radiology 249(3), 891–899 (2008).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
31 Fusco R, Sansone M, Petrillo A. The use of the Levenberg–Marquardt and variable projection curve-fitting algorithm in intravoxel incoherent motion method for DW-MRI data analysis. Appl. Magn. Reson. 46(5), 551–558 (2015).
Google Scholar
32 Fusco R, Sansone M, Petrillo A. A comparison of fitting algorithms for diffusion-weighted MRI data analysis using an intravoxel incoherent motion model. MAGMA 30(2), 113–120 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
33 Callot V, Bennett E, Decking UKM, Balaban RS, Wen H. In vivo study of microcirculation in canine myocardium using the IVIM method. Magn. Reson. Med. 50(3), 531–540 (2003).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
34 Yao L, Sinha U. Imaging the microcirculatory proton fraction of muscle with diffusion-weighted echo-planar imaging. Acad. Radiol. 7(1), 27–32 (2000).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
35 Wirestam R, Borg M, Brockstedt S, Lindgren A, Holtås S, Ståhlberg F. Perfusion-related parameters in intravoxel incoherent motion MRI compared with CBV and CBF measured by dynamic susceptibility-contrast MR technique. Acta Radiol. 42(2), 123–128 (2001).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
36 Moteki T, Horikoshi H. Evaluation of hepatic lesions and hepatic parenchyma using diffusion-weighted echo-planar MR with three values of gradient b-factor. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 24(3), 637–645 (2006).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
37 Granata V, Fusco R, Catalano O et al. Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) in diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for hepatocellular carcinoma: correlation with histologic grade. Oncotarget 7(48), 79357–79364 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
38 Krzanowski WJ. Principles of Multivariate Analysis. A User's Perspective. Oxford, NY, USA (2000).
Google Scholar
39 Fusco R, Sansone M, Filice S et al. Pattern recognition approaches for breast cancer DCE-MRI classification: a systematic review. J. Med. Biol. Eng. 36(4), 449–459 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
40 Fusco R, Sansone M, Filice S et al. Integration of DCE-MRI and DW-MRI quantitative parameters for breast lesion classification. Biomed. Res. Int. 2015, 237863 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
41 Bishop CM. Pattern recognition and machine learning. www.library.wisc.edu/selectedtocs/bg0137.pdf.
Google Scholar
42 Lam PD, Kuribayashi A, Imaizumi A et al. Differentiating benign and malignant salivary gland tumors: diagnostic criteria and the accuracy of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with high temporal resolution. Br. J. Radiol. 88(1049), 8–12 (2015).
Google Scholar
43 Assili S, Fathi Kazerooni A, Aghaghazvini L, Saligheh Rad HR, Pirayesh Islamian J. Dynamic contrast magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) and diffusion weighted MRI (DWI) for differentiation between benign and malignant salivary gland tumors. J. Biomed. Phys. Eng. 5(4), 157–168 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
44 Pesapane F, Patella F, Maria E et al. Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) in the periferic prostate cancer detection and stratification. Med. Oncol. 34(3), 35 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
45 Federau C, Cerny M, Roux M et al. IVIM perfusion fraction is prognostic for survival in brain glioma. Clin. Neuroradiol. 27(4), 485–492 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
46 Sumi M, Van Cauteren M, Sumi T, Obara M, Ichikawa Y, Nakamura T. Salivary gland tumors: use of intravoxel incoherent motion MRI for assessment of diffusion and perfusion for the differentiation of benign from malignant tumors. Radiology 263(3), 770–777 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
47 Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia 11(2), 102–125 (2009).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
48 Bernstein JM, Homer JJ, West CM. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers in head and neck cancer: potential to guide treatment? A systematic review. Oral Oncol. 50(10), 963–970 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
49 Noij DP, De Jong MC, Mulders LGM et al. Contrast-enhanced perfusion magnetic resonance imaging for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review. Oral Oncol. 51(2), 124–138 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
50 Attyé A, Troprès I, Rouchy R-C et al. Diffusion MRI: literature review in salivary gland tumors. Oral Dis. 37(12), 1412–1416 (2016).
Google Scholar
51 Parwani AV, Ali SZ. Diagnostic accuracy and pitfalls in fine-needle aspiration interpretation of Warthin tumor. Cancer 99(3), 166–171 (2003).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
52 Sourbron SP, Buckley DL. Classic models for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. NMR Biomed. 26(8), 1004–1027 (2013).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
53 Luypaert R, Sourbron S, De Mey J. Validity of perfusion parameters obtained using the modified Tofts model: a simulation study. Magn. Reson. Med. 65(5), 1491–1497 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
54 Heisen M, Fan X, Buurman J, Van Riel NAW, Karczmar GS, ter Haar Romeny BM. The influence of temporal resolution in determining pharmacokinetic parameters from DCE-MRI data. Magn. Reson. Med. 63(3), 811–816 (2010).
MedlineGoogle Scholar

Vol. 14, No. 28

Metrics

Downloaded 123 times

History

Received 21 November 2017

Accepted 24 January 2018

Published online 9 February 2018

Published in print December 2018

Information

Keywords

Author's contributions

Conception and design of the study was done by F Patella, M Petrillo, G Franceschelli, M Sansone and R Fusco. Administrative support was given by G Carrafiello. Provision of the study materials or patients was done by AM Saibene and F Biglioli. Collection and assembly of data was done by F Patella. Data analysis and interpretation was done by F Patella, M Petrillo, M Sansone and R Fusco. All the authors helped in writing the manuscript. Final approval of manuscript was given by all the authors.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank AF Boley and V Gopalakrishnan (NIH, MD, USA) for the English revision.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

Ethical conduct of research

The authors state that they have obtained appropriate institutional review board approval or have followed the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki for all human or animal experimental investigations. In addition, for investigations involving human subjects, informed consent has been obtained from the participants involved.

PDF download