Evaluation of Classic and Quantitative Imaging Features in the Differentiation of Benign and Atypical Lipomatous Soft Tissue Tumors Using a Standardized Multiparametric MRI Protocol: A Prospective Single-Centre Study in 45 Patients

Background: Discrimination between benign and atypical lipomatous tumors (ALT) is important due to potential local complications and recurrence of ALT but can be difficult due to the often-similar imaging appearance. Using a standardized MRI protocol, this study aimed to rank established and quantitative MRI features by diagnostic value in the differentiation of benign and atypical lipomatous tumors and to develop a robust scoring system. Methods: Patients with clinical or sonographic suspicion of a lipomatous tumor were prospectively and consecutively enrolled from 2015 to 2019 after ethic review board approval. Histology was confirmed for all ALT and 85% of the benign cases. Twenty-one demographic and morphologic and twenty-three quantitative features were extracted from a standardized MRI protocol (T1/T2-proton-density-weighting, turbo-inversion recovery magnitude, T2* multi-echo gradient-echo imaging, qDIXON-Vibe fat-quantification, T1 relaxometry, T1 mapping, diffusion-weighted and post-contrast sequences). A ranking of these features was generated through a Bayes network analysis with gain-ratio feature evaluation. Results: Forty-five patients were included in the analysis (mean age, 61.2 ± 14.2 years, 27 women [60.0%]). The highest-ranked ALT predictors were septation thickness (gain ratio merit [GRM] 0.623 ± 0.025, p = 0.0055), intra- and peritumoral STIR signal discrepancy (GRM 0.458 ± 0.046, p < 0.0001), orthogonal diameter (GRM 0.554 ± 0.188, p = 0.0013), contrast enhancement (GRM 0.235 ± 0.015, p = 0.0010) and maximum diameter (GRM 0.221 ± 0.075, p = 0.0009). The quantitative features did not provide a significant discriminatory value. The highest-ranked predictors were used to generate a five-tiered score for the identification of ALTs (correct classification rate 95.7% at a cut-off of three positive items, sensitivity 100.0%, specificity 94.9%, likelihood ratio 19.5). Conclusions: Several single MRI features have a substantial diagnostic value in the identification of ALT, yet a multiparametric approach by a simple combination algorithm may support radiologists in the identification of lipomatous tumors in need for further histological assessment.

[1]  Georgios S. Ioannidis,et al.  Multiexponential T2 relaxometry of benign and malignant adipocytic tumours , 2020, European Radiology Experimental.

[2]  Min Hee Lee,et al.  An MRI-based decision tree to distinguish lipomas and lipoma variants from well-differentiated liposarcoma of the extremity and superficial trunk: Classification and regression tree (CART) analysis. , 2020, European journal of radiology.

[3]  D. Boll,et al.  Quantitative signal intensity ratios to distinguish between subfascial lipoma and atypical lipomatous tumor/well-differentiated liposarcoma using short-tau inversion recovery (STIR) MRI. , 2020, Diagnostic and interventional imaging.

[4]  A. L. Wong,et al.  Qualitative evaluation of MRI features of lipoma and atypical lipomatous tumor: results from a multicenter study , 2020, Skeletal Radiology.

[5]  S. Sleijfer,et al.  Radiomics approach to distinguish between well differentiated liposarcomas and lipomas on MRI , 2019, The British journal of surgery.

[6]  E. Rummeny,et al.  Differentiating atypical lipomatous tumors from lipomas with magnetic resonance imaging: a comparison with MDM2 gene amplification status , 2019, BMC Cancer.

[7]  A. Karantanas,et al.  T2, T2* and spin coupling ratio as biomarkers for the study of lipomatous tumors. , 2019, Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics.

[8]  Ana-Maria Oros-Peusquens,et al.  A 3D two-point method for whole-brain water content and relaxation time mapping: Comparison with gold standard methods , 2018, PloS one.

[9]  S. Wuertzer,et al.  Spectrum of Fat-containing Soft-Tissue Masses at MR Imaging: The Common, the Uncommon, the Characteristic, and the Sometimes Confusing. , 2016, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[10]  H. Gruber,et al.  Does size reliably predict malignancy in soft tissue tumours? , 2016, European Radiology.

[11]  J. Forsberg,et al.  If your lump is bigger than a golf ball and growing, think Sarcoma. , 2015, European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology.

[12]  M. Yokouchi,et al.  Differentiation of lipoma and atypical lipomatous tumor by a scoring system: implication of increased vascularity on pathogenesis of liposarcoma , 2015, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.

[13]  S. Gurzu,et al.  Relationship of endothelial area with VEGF-A, COX-2, maspin, c-KIT, and DOG-1 immunoreactivity in liposarcomas versus non-lipomatous soft tissue tumors. , 2015, International journal of clinical and experimental pathology.

[14]  Berthold Kiefer,et al.  Liver fat quantification using a multi‐step adaptive fitting approach with multi‐echo GRE imaging , 2014, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[15]  C. Fletcher The evolving classification of soft tissue tumours – an update based on the new 2013 WHO classification , 2014, Histopathology.

[16]  อนิรุธ สืบสิงห์,et al.  Data Mining Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques , 2014 .

[17]  A. D. Tos Liposarcomas: diagnostic pitfalls and new insights , 2014 .

[18]  A. Flanagan,et al.  MRI characteristics of lipoma and atypical lipomatous tumor/well-differentiated liposarcoma: retrospective comparison with histology and MDM2 geneamplification , 2013, Skeletal Radiology.

[19]  Ronald M. Summers,et al.  Machine learning and radiology , 2012, Medical Image Anal..

[20]  P. Parizel,et al.  A comparison between histopathology and findings on magnetic resonance imaging of subcutaneous lipomatous soft-tissue tumors , 2011, Insights into imaging.

[21]  F. Sim,et al.  Molecular Testing for Lipomatous Tumors: Critical Analysis and Test Recommendations Based on the Analysis of 405 Extremity-based Tumors , 2010, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[22]  M. Hochman,et al.  Soft-tissue tumors and tumorlike lesions: a systematic imaging approach. , 2009, Radiology.

[23]  Laura W. Bancroft,et al.  Benign fatty tumors: classification, clinical course, imaging appearance, and treatment , 2003, Skeletal Radiology.

[24]  A. Drevelegas,et al.  Lipomatous tumors of soft tissue: MR appearance with histological correlation. , 2004, European journal of radiology.

[25]  Laura W Bancroft,et al.  Imaging of fatty tumors: distinction of lipoma and well-differentiated liposarcoma. , 2002, Radiology.

[26]  T. Rozental,et al.  Atypical Lipomatous Masses of the Extremities: Outcome of Surgical Treatment , 2002, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[27]  M. Rock,et al.  Well-differentiated liposarcoma. The Mayo Clinic experience with 58 cases. , 1994, American journal of clinical pathology.