Improving background suppression in diffusion-weighted imaging of the abdomen and pelvis using STIR with single-axis diffusion encoding

METastasis Reporting and Data System for Prostate Cancer as a Prognostic Imaging Marker in Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

METastasis Reporting and Data System for Prostate Cancer (MET-RADS-P) has been proposed as a standard of data acquisition and interpretation for whole-body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (WB-DWI) performed in men with advanced prostate cancer. The aim of this study is to demonstrate the clinical significance of the scores in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated WB-DWI obtained from 72 patients with CRPC between 2014 and 2017, when disease progression was suspected at the time of starting a new line of anticancer therapy. Twenty-five (35%) and 30 (42%) patients had a treatment history that included taxane-based chemotherapy and new hormonal drugs, respectively.

RESULTS

Active bone metastases were identified in 60 patients (83%; number of bone metastasis = 0, 1-2, 3-5, 6-10, and > 10: n = 12 [17%], 20 [28%], 11 [15%], 1 [1%], and 28 [39%], respectively). Progressive lymph node and visceral metastases were identified in 10 (14%) and 4 (6%), respectively. During the median follow-up period of 24 months, 36 (50%) died of prostate cancer. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was significantly stratified according to the MET-RADS-P scores of osseous metastatic burden and the presence of visceral metastasis (P < .0001). Multivariate analysis revealed that high osseous metastatic burden (> 10) and the presence of visceral metastasis were significant indicators of shorter CSS (P = .0036 and P = .0017, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The extent of bone metastasis and the presence of visceral metastasis on WB-DWI were associated with a shorter CSS in CRPC. MET-RADS-P score can be a prognostic imaging biomarker for CRPC.

Evaluation of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Follow-up and Treatment Response Assessment of Lymphoma: Results of an 18F-FDG-PET/CT–Controlled Prospective Study in 64 Patients

Purpose: To determine the value of diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI-MRI) for treatment response assessment in 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG)–avid lymphoma.

Experimental Design: Patients with FDG-avid Hodgkin (HL) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) at pretherapeutic 18F-FDG-PET/CT, who had also undergone pretherapeutic whole-body DWI-MRI, were included in this prospective study. Depending on the histologic lymphoma subtype, patients received different systemic treatment regimens, and follow-up DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT were performed at one or more time points, depending on the clinical course. For each follow-up DWI-MRI, region-based rates of agreement, and rates of agreement in terms of treatment response (complete remission, partial remission, stable disease, or progressive disease), relative to the corresponding 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were calculated.

Results: Sixty-four patients were included: 10 with HL, 22 with aggressive NHL, and 32 with indolent NHL. The overall region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.4%. For the 51 interim examinations (performed after 1–3 therapy cycles), region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.2%, and for the 48 end-of-treatment examinations, agreement was 99.8%. No significant differences, in terms of region-based agreement between DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were observed between the three lymphoma groups (HL, aggressive NHL, indolent NHL; P = 0.25), or between interim and end-of-treatment examinations (P = 0.21). With regard to treatment response assessment, DWI-MRI agreed with 18F-FDG-PET/CT in 99 of 102 follow-up examinations (97.1%), with a κ value of 0.94 (P &lt; 0.0001).

Conclusions: In patients with FDG-avid lymphoma, DWI-MRI may be a feasible alternative to 18F-FDG-PET/CT for follow-up and treatment response assessment. Clin Cancer Res; 21(11); 2506–13. ©2015 AACR.

Evaluation of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Follow-up and Treatment Response Assessment of Lymphoma: Results of an 18F-FDG-PET/CT–Controlled Prospective Study in 64 Patients

Purpose: To determine the value of diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI-MRI) for treatment response assessment in 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG)–avid lymphoma.

Experimental Design: Patients with FDG-avid Hodgkin (HL) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) at pretherapeutic 18F-FDG-PET/CT, who had also undergone pretherapeutic whole-body DWI-MRI, were included in this prospective study. Depending on the histologic lymphoma subtype, patients received different systemic treatment regimens, and follow-up DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT were performed at one or more time points, depending on the clinical course. For each follow-up DWI-MRI, region-based rates of agreement, and rates of agreement in terms of treatment response (complete remission, partial remission, stable disease, or progressive disease), relative to the corresponding 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were calculated.

Results: Sixty-four patients were included: 10 with HL, 22 with aggressive NHL, and 32 with indolent NHL. The overall region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.4%. For the 51 interim examinations (performed after 1–3 therapy cycles), region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.2%, and for the 48 end-of-treatment examinations, agreement was 99.8%. No significant differences, in terms of region-based agreement between DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were observed between the three lymphoma groups (HL, aggressive NHL, indolent NHL; P = 0.25), or between interim and end-of-treatment examinations (P = 0.21). With regard to treatment response assessment, DWI-MRI agreed with 18F-FDG-PET/CT in 99 of 102 follow-up examinations (97.1%), with a κ value of 0.94 (P &lt; 0.0001).

Conclusions: In patients with FDG-avid lymphoma, DWI-MRI may be a feasible alternative to 18F-FDG-PET/CT for follow-up and treatment response assessment. Clin Cancer Res; 21(11); 2506–13. ©2015 AACR.

Evaluation of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Follow-up and Treatment Response Assessment of Lymphoma: Results of an 18F-FDG-PET/CT–Controlled Prospective Study in 64 Patients

Purpose: To determine the value of diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI-MRI) for treatment response assessment in 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG)–avid lymphoma.

Experimental Design: Patients with FDG-avid Hodgkin (HL) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) at pretherapeutic 18F-FDG-PET/CT, who had also undergone pretherapeutic whole-body DWI-MRI, were included in this prospective study. Depending on the histologic lymphoma subtype, patients received different systemic treatment regimens, and follow-up DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT were performed at one or more time points, depending on the clinical course. For each follow-up DWI-MRI, region-based rates of agreement, and rates of agreement in terms of treatment response (complete remission, partial remission, stable disease, or progressive disease), relative to the corresponding 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were calculated.

Results: Sixty-four patients were included: 10 with HL, 22 with aggressive NHL, and 32 with indolent NHL. The overall region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.4%. For the 51 interim examinations (performed after 1–3 therapy cycles), region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.2%, and for the 48 end-of-treatment examinations, agreement was 99.8%. No significant differences, in terms of region-based agreement between DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were observed between the three lymphoma groups (HL, aggressive NHL, indolent NHL; P = 0.25), or between interim and end-of-treatment examinations (P = 0.21). With regard to treatment response assessment, DWI-MRI agreed with 18F-FDG-PET/CT in 99 of 102 follow-up examinations (97.1%), with a κ value of 0.94 (P &lt; 0.0001).

Conclusions: In patients with FDG-avid lymphoma, DWI-MRI may be a feasible alternative to 18F-FDG-PET/CT for follow-up and treatment response assessment. Clin Cancer Res; 21(11); 2506–13. ©2015 AACR.

Evaluation of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Follow-up and Treatment Response Assessment of Lymphoma: Results of an 18F-FDG-PET/CT–Controlled Prospective Study in 64 Patients

Purpose: To determine the value of diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI-MRI) for treatment response assessment in 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG)–avid lymphoma.

Experimental Design: Patients with FDG-avid Hodgkin (HL) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) at pretherapeutic 18F-FDG-PET/CT, who had also undergone pretherapeutic whole-body DWI-MRI, were included in this prospective study. Depending on the histologic lymphoma subtype, patients received different systemic treatment regimens, and follow-up DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT were performed at one or more time points, depending on the clinical course. For each follow-up DWI-MRI, region-based rates of agreement, and rates of agreement in terms of treatment response (complete remission, partial remission, stable disease, or progressive disease), relative to the corresponding 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were calculated.

Results: Sixty-four patients were included: 10 with HL, 22 with aggressive NHL, and 32 with indolent NHL. The overall region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.4%. For the 51 interim examinations (performed after 1–3 therapy cycles), region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.2%, and for the 48 end-of-treatment examinations, agreement was 99.8%. No significant differences, in terms of region-based agreement between DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were observed between the three lymphoma groups (HL, aggressive NHL, indolent NHL; P = 0.25), or between interim and end-of-treatment examinations (P = 0.21). With regard to treatment response assessment, DWI-MRI agreed with 18F-FDG-PET/CT in 99 of 102 follow-up examinations (97.1%), with a κ value of 0.94 (P &lt; 0.0001).

Conclusions: In patients with FDG-avid lymphoma, DWI-MRI may be a feasible alternative to 18F-FDG-PET/CT for follow-up and treatment response assessment. Clin Cancer Res; 21(11); 2506–13. ©2015 AACR.

Evaluation of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Follow-up and Treatment Response Assessment of Lymphoma: Results of an 18F-FDG-PET/CT–Controlled Prospective Study in 64 Patients

Purpose: To determine the value of diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI-MRI) for treatment response assessment in 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG)–avid lymphoma.

Experimental Design: Patients with FDG-avid Hodgkin (HL) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) at pretherapeutic 18F-FDG-PET/CT, who had also undergone pretherapeutic whole-body DWI-MRI, were included in this prospective study. Depending on the histologic lymphoma subtype, patients received different systemic treatment regimens, and follow-up DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT were performed at one or more time points, depending on the clinical course. For each follow-up DWI-MRI, region-based rates of agreement, and rates of agreement in terms of treatment response (complete remission, partial remission, stable disease, or progressive disease), relative to the corresponding 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were calculated.

Results: Sixty-four patients were included: 10 with HL, 22 with aggressive NHL, and 32 with indolent NHL. The overall region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.4%. For the 51 interim examinations (performed after 1–3 therapy cycles), region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.2%, and for the 48 end-of-treatment examinations, agreement was 99.8%. No significant differences, in terms of region-based agreement between DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were observed between the three lymphoma groups (HL, aggressive NHL, indolent NHL; P = 0.25), or between interim and end-of-treatment examinations (P = 0.21). With regard to treatment response assessment, DWI-MRI agreed with 18F-FDG-PET/CT in 99 of 102 follow-up examinations (97.1%), with a κ value of 0.94 (P &lt; 0.0001).

Conclusions: In patients with FDG-avid lymphoma, DWI-MRI may be a feasible alternative to 18F-FDG-PET/CT for follow-up and treatment response assessment. Clin Cancer Res; 21(11); 2506–13. ©2015 AACR.

Evaluation of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Follow-up and Treatment Response Assessment of Lymphoma: Results of an 18F-FDG-PET/CT–Controlled Prospective Study in 64 Patients

Purpose: To determine the value of diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI-MRI) for treatment response assessment in 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG)–avid lymphoma.

Experimental Design: Patients with FDG-avid Hodgkin (HL) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) at pretherapeutic 18F-FDG-PET/CT, who had also undergone pretherapeutic whole-body DWI-MRI, were included in this prospective study. Depending on the histologic lymphoma subtype, patients received different systemic treatment regimens, and follow-up DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT were performed at one or more time points, depending on the clinical course. For each follow-up DWI-MRI, region-based rates of agreement, and rates of agreement in terms of treatment response (complete remission, partial remission, stable disease, or progressive disease), relative to the corresponding 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were calculated.

Results: Sixty-four patients were included: 10 with HL, 22 with aggressive NHL, and 32 with indolent NHL. The overall region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.4%. For the 51 interim examinations (performed after 1–3 therapy cycles), region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.2%, and for the 48 end-of-treatment examinations, agreement was 99.8%. No significant differences, in terms of region-based agreement between DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were observed between the three lymphoma groups (HL, aggressive NHL, indolent NHL; P = 0.25), or between interim and end-of-treatment examinations (P = 0.21). With regard to treatment response assessment, DWI-MRI agreed with 18F-FDG-PET/CT in 99 of 102 follow-up examinations (97.1%), with a κ value of 0.94 (P &lt; 0.0001).

Conclusions: In patients with FDG-avid lymphoma, DWI-MRI may be a feasible alternative to 18F-FDG-PET/CT for follow-up and treatment response assessment. Clin Cancer Res; 21(11); 2506–13. ©2015 AACR.

Evaluation of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Follow-up and Treatment Response Assessment of Lymphoma: Results of an 18F-FDG-PET/CT–Controlled Prospective Study in 64 Patients

Purpose: To determine the value of diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI-MRI) for treatment response assessment in 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG)–avid lymphoma.

Experimental Design: Patients with FDG-avid Hodgkin (HL) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) at pretherapeutic 18F-FDG-PET/CT, who had also undergone pretherapeutic whole-body DWI-MRI, were included in this prospective study. Depending on the histologic lymphoma subtype, patients received different systemic treatment regimens, and follow-up DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT were performed at one or more time points, depending on the clinical course. For each follow-up DWI-MRI, region-based rates of agreement, and rates of agreement in terms of treatment response (complete remission, partial remission, stable disease, or progressive disease), relative to the corresponding 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were calculated.

Results: Sixty-four patients were included: 10 with HL, 22 with aggressive NHL, and 32 with indolent NHL. The overall region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.4%. For the 51 interim examinations (performed after 1–3 therapy cycles), region-based agreement of DWI-MRI with 18F-FDG-PET/CT was 99.2%, and for the 48 end-of-treatment examinations, agreement was 99.8%. No significant differences, in terms of region-based agreement between DWI-MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were observed between the three lymphoma groups (HL, aggressive NHL, indolent NHL; P = 0.25), or between interim and end-of-treatment examinations (P = 0.21). With regard to treatment response assessment, DWI-MRI agreed with 18F-FDG-PET/CT in 99 of 102 follow-up examinations (97.1%), with a κ value of 0.94 (P &lt; 0.0001).

Conclusions: In patients with FDG-avid lymphoma, DWI-MRI may be a feasible alternative to 18F-FDG-PET/CT for follow-up and treatment response assessment. Clin Cancer Res; 21(11); 2506–13. ©2015 AACR.