4.6 Article

Quantitative Evaluation of Diffusion and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR in Tumor Parenchyma and Peritumoral Area for Distinction of Brain Tumors

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 10, Issue 9, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138573

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81201074]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [13ykpy14]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose To quantitatively evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of parameters from diffusion and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR which based on tumor parenchyma (TP) and peritumoral (PT) area in classification of brain tumors. Methods 45 patients (male: 23, female: 22; mean age: 46 y) were prospectively recruited and they underwent conventional, DCE-MR and DWI examination. With each tumor, 10-15 regions of interest (ROIs) were manually placed on TP and PT area. ADC and permeability parameters (K-trans, Ve, Kep and iAUC) were calculated and their diagnostic efficiency was assessed. Results In TP, all permeability parameters and ADC value could significantly discriminate Low-from High grade gliomas (HGG) (p<0.001); among theses parameters, Ve demonstrated the highest diagnostic power (iAUC: 0.79, cut-off point: 0.15); the most sensitive and specific index for gliomas grading were K-trans (84%) and Kep (89%). While, in PT area, only K-trans could help in gliomas grading (P = 0.009, cut-off point: 0.03 min(-1)). Moreover, in TP, mean Ve and iAUC of primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) and metastases were significantly higher than that in HGG (p<0.003). Further, in PT area, mean K-trans (p <= 0.004) could discriminate PCNSL from HGG and ADC (p <= 0.003) could differentiate metastases with HGG. Conclusions Quantitative ADC and permeability parameters from Diffusion and DCE-MR in TP and PT area, especially DCE-MR, can aid in gliomas grading and brain tumors discrimination.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available