Diffusion-weighted imaging of rectal cancer on repeatability and cancer characterization: an effect of b-value distribution study

BackgroundTo explore the effect of b-value distributions on the repeatability and diagnostic performance of the ADC value in rectal cancer patients using multiple b-values and mono-exponential model diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI).MethodsThirty-two preoperative rectal cancer patients, without receiving neoadjuvant therapy, were scanned on a 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging scanner using DWI with 10 b-values ranging from 0 to 2000 s/mm2. The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value was calculated using a mono-exponential model and 31 b-value combinations consisting of 2 to 10 b-values were explored. Regions of interest with the maximum cross-sectional tumour size were outlined on the ADC map by two independent observers. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), coefficient of variation (CV), and Bland-Altman plots between the two observers were calculated and evaluated to determine repeatability. Areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) were evaluated for rectal cancer characterization. Correlations between the mean ADC values and T stage were assessed using the Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ). α (= ICC + AUC + |ρ|- CV - |bias|) was defined and used to assess the optimal b-value distribution.ResultsPostoperative pathology tests revealed 4 patients with T1, 10 patients with T2, and 18 patients with T3 stages. There were no significant difference in age and sex between the two groups (T1–2 vs. T3). Excellent reproducibility was observed for ADC values between two observers with ICC and CV values ranging from 0.920 to 0.998, and 1.475 to 5.568%, respectively. The mean percent difference and ρ between the paired measurements was ranged from − 2.7 to 1.2% and from − 0.759 to − 0.407, respectively. The b-value combinations with the top three α values were b(0, 1000 s/mm2), b(500, 1500, 2000 s/mm2) and b(100, 1000, 1500 s/mm2) for α = 2.581, 2.571 and 2.569, respectively.ConclusionsThe number of b-values and their distributions influenced the repeatability of the ADC values and their diagnostic performance. The optimal b-value combination was 0 and 1000 s/mm2 for DWI examination of rectal cancer patients.

[1]  Luís Curvo-Semedo,et al.  Tumour ADC measurements in rectal cancer: effect of ROI methods on ADC values and interobserver variability , 2011, European Radiology.

[2]  D. Collins,et al.  Intravoxel incoherent motion in body diffusion-weighted MRI: reality and challenges. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[3]  J. E. Gonçalves,et al.  Quantitative Aspects of Diffusion-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Rectal Cancer Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy , 2017, Radiology and oncology.

[4]  D. Collins,et al.  Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[5]  S. Fujii,et al.  Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurement in ovarian tumor: Effect of region‐of‐interest methods on ADC values and diagnostic ability , 2016, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[6]  Gary P Liney,et al.  Correlation of ADC and T2 Measurements With Cell Density in Prostate Cancer at 3.0 Tesla , 2009, Investigative radiology.

[7]  Chung-Cheng Hsieh,et al.  Prognostic Significance of Partial Tumor Regression After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis , 2013, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[8]  M. Barton,et al.  The Potential for an Enhanced Role for MRI in Radiation-therapy Treatment Planning , 2013, Technology in cancer research & treatment.

[9]  Dipanjali Mondal,et al.  Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in primary rectal cancer staging demonstrates but does not characterise lymph nodes , 2013, European Radiology.

[10]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer statistics in China, 2015 , 2016, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[11]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  C. Mathers,et al.  Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: Sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012 , 2015, International journal of cancer.

[13]  Y. Jeong,et al.  Predicting response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: Diffusion‐weighted 3 tesla MR imaging , 2012, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[14]  Gary P Liney,et al.  Functional MRI for quantitative treatment response prediction in locally advanced rectal cancer. , 2017, The British journal of radiology.

[15]  Caroline Reinhold,et al.  The use of MR imaging in treatment planning for patients with rectal carcinoma: have you checked the "DISTANCE"? , 2013, Radiology.

[16]  Ahmed Kamel,et al.  Colon Cancer, Version 1.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. , 2017, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN.

[17]  D. Wen,et al.  Comparison of non-Gaussian and Gaussian diffusion models of diffusion weighted imaging of rectal cancer at 3.0 T MRI , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[18]  Rui Bi,et al.  Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) Value: A Potential Imaging Biomarker That Reflects the Biological Features of Rectal Cancer , 2014, PloS one.

[19]  Gary Liney,et al.  Study protocol: multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging for therapeutic response prediction in rectal cancer , 2017, BMC Cancer.

[20]  Q. Feng,et al.  T staging of rectal cancer: Accuracy of diffusion‐weighted imaging compared with T2‐weighted imaging on 3.0 tesla MRI , 2014, Journal of digestive diseases.

[21]  S. Schoenberg,et al.  Image Quality Assessment of 2D versus 3D T2WI and Evaluation of Ultra-high b-Value (b=2,000 mm/s2) DWI for Response Assessment in Rectal Cancer. , 2018, Anticancer research.

[22]  M. Philippens,et al.  Repeatability of diffusion‐weighted imaging in rectal cancer , 2014, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[23]  Yong Zhang,et al.  Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A preliminary study of the effect of region of interest on ADC values and interobserver variability , 2016, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[24]  Lawrence Tanenbaum,et al.  Diffusion‐weighted imaging outside the brain: Consensus statement from an ISMRM‐sponsored workshop , 2016, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.