Purpose: Lymphoproliferative neoplasms are the largest and most frequently diagnosed entities in the group of haematological malignancies. The aim of the study was to assess whether apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measured on the first day of the second cycle of chemotherapy could be a predictor of prognosis and of the final treatment's outcome. Material and methods: The study included 27 patients with diagnosed Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, who had magnetic resonance (MR) performed with diffusion weighted imaging/apparent diffusion coefficient (DWI/ADC) before and on the first day of the second cycle of chemotherapy. Imaging was performed using a 1.5 T MR scanner. ADC was measured in lymphoma infiltration in the area of the lowest signal in the ADC map and the highest signal on b 800 images in post-treatment study. After that, the corresponding area was determined in a pre-treatment study and an ADC value was measured. Results: The difference between ADC values in pre-treatment (ADC = 720 mm2/s) and post-treatment (ADC = 1059 mm2/s) studies was statistically significant (p  752 mm2/s before treatment manifested lower probability of progression than patients with ADC < 752 mm2/s. Conclusions: ADC measurement's before treatment and on the first day of the second cycle of chemotherapy can be used as a prognostic marker in lymphoma therapy. ADC values lower than 1080 mm2/s and an increase of the ratio after the treatment can be considered as a marker of disease progression

Badowski, Roman

Hołownia, Daniel

Kuliszkiewicz-Janus, Małgorzata

Kwiatkowski, Jacek

Mazur, Rafał

Patyk, Mateusz

Pawluś, Aleksander

Silicki, Jurand

Sokołowska-Dąbek, Dąbrówka

Szymańska, Kinga

Zaleska-Dorobisz, Urszula

Polish Journal of Radiology

Jagiellonian Univeristy Repository

e1© Pol J Radiol 2018; 83: e210-e214© Pol J Radiol 2018; 83: e210-e214DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/pjr.2018.76007Received:  06.02.2018Accepted:  23.02.2018Published:  12.05.2018 http://www.polradiol.comOriginal paperApplication of the apparent diffusion coefficient in magnetic resonance imaging in an assessment of the early response to treatment  in Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma – pilot studyMateusz Patyk1C,D,E,F, Jacek Kwiatkowski2A,B,D,E, Aleksander Pawluś1A,B,D,E, Daniel Hołownia1C,E, Kinga Szymańska1D,E,  Rafał Mazur1E,F, Jurand Silicki1C,E, Roman Badowski1A,E, Dąbrówka Sokołowska-Dąbek1A,D,E,  Małgorzata Kuliszkiewicz-Janus2A,D, Urszula Zaleska-Dorobisz1A,D 1Department of General and Paediatric Radiology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland 2Department and Clinic of Haematology, Blood Neoplasms, and Bone Marrow Transplantation, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, PolandAbstractPurpose: Lymphoproliferative neoplasms are the largest and most frequently diagnosed entities in the group of haema­tological malignancies. The aim of the study was to assess whether apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measured on the first day of the second cycle of chemotherapy could be a predictor of prognosis and of the final treatment’s outcome.Material and methods: The study included 27 patients with diagnosed Hodgkin’s and non­Hodgkin’s lymphoma, who had magnetic resonance (MR) performed with diffusion weighted imaging/apparent diffusion coefficient (DWI/ADC) before and on the first day of the second cycle of chemotherapy. Imaging was performed using a 1.5 T MR scanner. ADC was measured in lymphoma infiltration in the area of the lowest signal in the ADC map and the highest signal on b 800 images in post­treatment study. After that, the corresponding area was determined in a pre­treatment study and an ADC value was measured. Results: The difference between ADC values in pre­treatment (ADC = 720 mm2/s) and post­treatment (ADC = 1059 mm2/s) studies was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Cutoff values for estimating response to treatment were established at the level of ADC 1080 mm2/s, and ADC to muscle ratio at 0.82 in post­treatment study. Patients with ADC > 752 mm2/s before treatment manifested lower probability of progression than patients with ADC < 752 mm2/s. Conclusions: ADC measurement’s before treatment and on the first day of the second cycle of chemotherapy can be used as a prognostic marker in lymphoma therapy. ADC values lower than 1080 mm2/s and an increase of the ratio after the treatment can be considered as a marker of disease progression. Key words: lymphoma, Hodgkin’s lymphoma, magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion MRI. Correspondence address: Mateusz Patyk, Department of General and Paediatric Radiology, Wrocław Medical University, 68 M. Curie-Skłodowskiej St., 50-369 Wrocław, Poland, phone: +48 71 784 26 51, e-mail: mtpatyk@gmail.comAuthors’ contribution: A Study design ∙ B Data collection ∙ C Statistical analysis ∙ D Data interpretation ∙ E Manuscript preparation ∙ F Literature search ∙ G Funds collectionIntroductionLymphoproliferative neoplasms are the largest and most frequently diagnosed entities in the group of haematolog­ical malignancies [1] staging, and response assessment of patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Over the years an increasing trend of incidence rate of lymphomas has been noticed. Currently it amounts to approximately 20­22 new cases per 100,000 persons per year, according to various regi sters [2, 3].Mateusz Patyk, Jacek Kwiatkowski, Aleksander Pawluś et al.  e2 © Pol J Radiol 2018; 83: e210-e214Introducing new diagnostic tools to everyday prac­tice allows more precise evaluation of disease. One of the most important aspects is the evaluation of response to treatment. Accurate assessment of early response is crucial to the diagnosis of lymphoma. This allows patients to be distinguished within the high­risk groups and to modi­fy ineffective treatment in the early stages. This is of ut­most importance in the context of individualisation and optimisation of treatment, contributing to positive effects for both the patients and for the entire health care system (economic effect).Positron emission tomography computed tomog­raphy (PET/CT) scanning is currently considered to be the reference method for the assessment of response in the majority of lymphomas, especially in the evaluation of early response to treatment in HL [4]who underwent both [18F]­FDG­PET/CT and whole­body MRI (including T1­ and diffusion­weighted sequences). There are several studies describing the potential role of diffusion weight­ed imaging (DWI) in the diagnosis and evaluation of re­sponse to treatment of lymphomas [5] 31 females, medi­an age – 42 years, range 15­86 years. DWI is a technique in which the image contrast reflects the in vivo changes in the motion of water molecules (Brownian motion) in tissues. A supplemental tool in DWI is the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) map, acquired by post­pro­cessing of the obtained DWI images [6]. ADC allows for quantitative definition of diffusion parameters (in mm2/s) (Fig. 1). The applicability of DWI has been confirmed e.g. in the detection of ischaemic stroke or in the evaluation of breast or prostate gland abnormalities. Numerous recent studies associated with DWI have focused on utilisation of its tools to evaluate response to treatment in oncological patients. Haematological diseases seem to be a very per­spective area for the DWI tools, e.g. due to high cellularity of lymphoma infiltration [7].The purpose of this study was the assessment of the DWI/ADC imaging protocol in the evaluation of the ear­ly response to treatment of Hodgkin’s and non­Hodgkin’s lymphomas. Additionally, we analysed whether the ADC measured on the first day of the second cycle of chemo­therapy could be a predictor of prognosis and of the final outcome of the treatment.Material and methodsThe study included the final group of 27 patients with Hodgkin’s and non­Hodgkin’s lymphoma diagnosed (Table 1). They underwent MRI of the area in question be­fore the treatment and on the first day of the second cycle of chemotherapy. All examinations were performed using a 1.5 T MR unit with a conventional phased array body coil. The DWI was performed using a standard protocol, namely the single­shot spin­echo­planar imaging (EPI) in the axial plane, with the following parameters: TR 5200­6000 ms, TE – 72 ms, voxel size 2 × 2 × 5, Bw 1448 Hz/px, b values 50, 400, and 800, 30­45 slices, duration ~6 min.ADC maps were calculated with a dedicated work­station. ADC values were measured in lymphoma infil­tration in the area of the lowest signal in the ADC map images in post­treatment study, paying particular attention to avoid areas that could affect the DWI signal, e.g. hae­matomas. The corresponding area was determined in the pre­treatment study, and the pre­treatment ADC values were measured afterwards. Only oval­shaped ROIs were used to measure the ADC values, and the size thereof was adjusted to the size of the area with the lowest ADC signal. The ADC values were analysed as an independent value and as a ratio – dorsal muscles were used as the reference organs (Fig. 2). A Wilcoxon test was performed to verify the difference between the ADC values before and after the treatment. The ROC curve was used to determine the cut­off values, and the odds ratio was calculated.ResultsThere was a statistically significant difference between the ADC values in the pre­treatment (ADC = 720 mm2/s) and post­treatment (ADC = 1059 mm2/s) studies (Fig. 3). The ADC value increased significantly in both groups (Table 2, Fig. 4). In the group of patients with diagnosed HL the ADC increased by 344 mm2/s on average, and by 206 mm2/s in patients with non­Hodgkin’s lymphoma, respectively. The cut­off values used for estimation of the response to the treatment were established at the level Figure 1. MRI-DWI ADC map in a patient with non-Hodgkin’s lymphomaTable 1. Patients’ characteristics (N = 27)FactorSex, male/female (n) 22/5Age, mean ± SD (years) 41.5 ± 15.6Age, median (years) 41 Hodgkin’s lymphoma (n) 8Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (n) 19 Application of the ADC in MRI in an assessment of the early response to treatment in Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma – pilot studye3© Pol J Radiol 2018; 83: e210-e214of ADC 1080 mm2/s, and the ADC to muscle ratio 0.82 in the post­treatment study (Fig. 3). The patients with ADC > 752 mm2/s before treatment demonstrated low­er probability of progression than the patients with ADC < 752 mm2/s (p = 0.046). Considering the changes be­tween the studies, an increase of the ADC by 34.5% and an increase of the ratio of by 32.5% were determined as the cut­off values. The highest odd ratios were calculated proving that the pre­examination ADC or the ratio itself would serve best for an assessment of the low response risk. Discussion Advanced imaging techniques play an important role in the diagnosis, evaluation, and staging of lymphomas [1]staging, and response assessment of patients with HL. De­spite the fact that the sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT with 18F­FDG depends on the histological lymphoma subtype, the Lugano classification of malignant lympho­mas recommends the use of PET/CT with 18F­FDG as the reference imaging technique combined with bone mar­row biopsy (BM) [1, 8] staging, and response assessment of patients with HL. There are several studies describing the role of whole­body MRI, with the DWI/ADC meas­urement as a diagnostic tool in the evaluation of patients with lymphoma [9­12] metabolic tumor volume (MTV). The potential role of the measurements of DWI/ADC in patients with non­Hodgkin’s lymphoma was well de­scribed in 2012 by Chen and Zhong. The authors reported that WB­DWI can be adopted to detect morphological changes of lesions, but moreover it provides important functional information about the growth and decline pro­cess of tumour cells [13]. The effectiveness of PET­CT and MRI DWI/ADC in the initial stages of malignant lympho­ma was analysed in another study. The authors compared these two methods in a pretherapeutic context and agree­ment for Ann Arbor staging. They reported high repeat­Figure 3. Comparison of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values before and after the treatment (Student’s t-test, independent samples)ADC1300120011001000900800700600Before AfterT-test for dependent samples: t = –4.379, p = 0.0002Mean Mean ± SE Mean 1.96SEFigure 2. Apparent diffusion coefficient maps. A) Study before treatment, B) study during treatment. 39-year-old male patient with follicular lymphoma. ROIs placed in the tumour and in dorsal muscle as a reference. An increase of the ratio of approx. 6% was calculated. There was a progression of the disease in the follow-up and the patient diedA Bability and agreement of MRI DWI/ADC with PET­CT [14]. Different results were stated by investigators from Finland. Wu et al. indicated superiority of the measure­ments of the standardised uptake value (SUV) of 2­deoxy­2­[18F]fluoro­D­glucose (18F­FDG) against DWI/ADC in patients with diffuse large B­cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma. There were weak inversed correlations be­tween the SUVmax and ADCmin in all cases, but it was not repeated in subgroups [9] MTV. The prognostic feature of the DWI/ADC was the subject of the study performed on the group of 28 patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma. It was investigated which DWI/ADC rank or parameter is a better biomarker of the response to treatment. It was revealed that DWI/ADC 5th percentiles are good predictors for progression­free survival. The early response to treatment is an important in­dicator of a patient’s condition and prognosis [15]. Ap­propriately quick assessment enables modification of the treatment protocol and if necessary adjustment to pa­tient’s needs. In this study we evaluated weather the ADC measured on the first day of the second cycle of chemo­therapy could be a predictor of prognosis and of the final Mateusz Patyk, Jacek Kwiatkowski, Aleksander Pawluś et al.  e4 © Pol J Radiol 2018; 83: e210-e214treatment’s outcome. There was a statistically significant difference between the DWI/ADC values in groups with Hodgkin’s and non­Hodgkin’s lymphomas. Patients with HL had higher values of DWI/ADC before and after the treatment (respectively, p = 0.027 and p = 0.029). Simi­lar results were obtained in other studies [1, 16, 17] i.e., indolent versus aggressive lymphoma, and also to assess the prognostic value of different quantitative parameters of whole­body. Our results indicated that patients with ADC > 752 mm2/s before treatment demonstrated low­er probability of progression than the patients with ADC < 752 mm2/s (p = 0.046). Mosavi et al. similarly reported a significant relationship between higher mean ADC and longer overall survival (p = 0.006) [16]. An increase of the ADC by 34.5% after the second cycle of chemotherapy correlates with a better prognosis. This result has not been confirmed in other cancers. Multivariate analysis in head and neck cancer revealed that lower pre­treatment ADC was associated with a better response to treatment [16].There were some limitations to this pilot study, such as the small number of patients with diagnosed non­Hodg­kin’s lymphoma, or lack of histopathological results. Figure 4. Comparison of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values before and after the treatment in groups with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (Group A) and Hodgkin’s lymphoma (Group C) (Student’s t-test, samples)ADC140012001000900800600Before AfterT-test for dependent samples: t = –3.556, p = 0.002ADC1000900800700600500400Before AfterT-test for dependent samples: t = –6.608, p = 0.0003Mean Mean ± SE Mean 1.96*SEMean Mean ± SE Mean 1.96SEA BTable 2. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values before and after the treatment of patients with diagnosed Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (Student’s t-test)Parameter Total, N = 27 Type of lymphoma A vs. CA (non-Hodgkin’s), n = 19 C (Hodgkin’s), n = 8ADC before treatmentp = 0.027M ± SD 720 ± 179 768 ± 176 604 ± 132Me (Q1; Q3) 710 (572; 780) 732 (675; 840) 571 (533; 729)Min-Max 388-1117 480-1117 388-780ADC after treatmentp = 0.029M ± SD 1059 ± 414 1164 ± 442 810 ± 184Me (Q1; Q3) 980 (750; 1235) 1115 (790; 1377) 775 (688; 963)Min-Max 549-2098 568-2098 549-1080Odds ratio before treatmentp = 0.004M ± SD 0.576 ± 0.155 0.630 ± 0.147 0.450 ± 0.086Me (Q1; Q3) 0.53 (0.45; 0.71) 0.61 (0.52; 0.77) 0.43 (0.40; 0.51)Min-Max 0.32-0.94 0.39-0.94 0.32-0.60Odds ratio after treatmentp = 0.061M ± SD 0.791 ± 0.348 0.872 ± 0.383 0.599 ± 0.117Me (Q1; Q3) 0.65 (0.56; 1.07) 0.79 (0.61; 1.23) 0.58 (0.53; 0.65)Min-Max 0.11-1.54 0.11-1.54 0.45-0.82M – mean value, SD – standard dimension, Me – median, Q1 – lower quartile, Q3 – upper quartile, Min – minimum value, Max – maximum value, p – p-value Application of the ADC in MRI in an assessment of the early response to treatment in Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma – pilot studye5© Pol J Radiol 2018; 83: e210-e214Moreover, a whole­body MRI was not available at the time of examination and MRI was performed only within the range of interest.ConclusionsMeasurements of the ADC values before treatment and on the first day of the second cycle of chemotherapy can be used as a prognostic marker in the therapy of lympho­mas. The most promising tool for assessing response to treatment seems to be the ratio between the ADC value measured in the area of infiltration and the ADC value of the reference organ (in our case – dorsal muscles). We calculated that an increase of the ratio lower than 32.5% could serve as a poor prognostic factor and could lead to modification of treatment. Early DWI/ADC measure­ments enable shortening of the diagnostic process, thus obtaining a quicker assessment of prognosis. An early re­sponse to treatment can influence further therapy and can potentially increase the chances for regression of lympho­ma. The results seem to be promising, but further studies with larger groups of patients and long­term follow­up are essential to prove the usefulness of the DWI/ADC meas­urements in the evaluation of lymphoma.Conflict of interestThe authors report no conflict of interest.References1. Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF, et al. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of hodgkin and non­hodgkin lymphoma: The lugano classification. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32: 3059­3067. 2. Campo E, Swerdlow SH, Harris NL, et al. The 2008 WHO classifi­cation of lymphoid neoplasms and beyond : evolving concepts and practical applications The 2008 WHO classification of lymphoid ne­oplasms and beyond : evolving concepts and practical applications. 2014; 117: 5019­5033. 3. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS, et al. Use of positron emis­sion tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: Consensus of the imaging subcommittee of international harmonization pro­ject in lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 571­578. 4. Asenbaum U, Nolz R, Karanikas G, et al. Evaluation of [18F]­FDG­based hybrid imaging combinations for assessment of bone mar­row involvement in lymphoma at initial staging. PLoS One 2016; 11: 1­12. 5. Albano D, Patti C, La Grutta L, et al. Comparison between whole­body MRI with diffusion­weighted imaging and PET/CT in staging newly diagnosed FDG­avid lymphomas. Eur J Radiol 2016; 85: 313­318. 6. Azzedine B, Kahina MB, Dimitri P, et al. Whole­body diffusion­ weighted MRI for staging lymphoma at 3.0T: Comparative study with MR imaging at 1.5T. Clin Imaging 2015; 39: 104­109. 7. Lin C, Itti E, Luciani A, et al. Whole­body diffusion­weighted imag­ing in lymphoma. Cancer Imaging 2010; 10: 172­178. 8. Johnson SA, Kumar A, Matasar MJ, et al. Imaging for Staging and Response Assessment in Lymphoma. Radiology 2015; 276: 323­338. 9. Wu X, Pertovaara H, Korkola P, et al. Correlations between func­tional imaging markers derived from PET/CT and diffusion­weight­ed MRI in diffuse large B­cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma. PLoS One 2014; 9: 1­8. 10. Kwee TC, Takahara T, Ochiai R, et al. Diffusion­weighted whole­body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): Features and potential applications in oncology. Eur Radiol 2008; 18: 1937­1952. 11. Kwee TC, Basu S, Torigian DA, et al. Evolving importance of dif­fusion­weighted magnetic resonance imaging in lymphoma. PET Clin 2012; 7: 73­82. 12. Padhani AR, Koh DM, Collins DJ. Whole­Body Diffusion­weighted MR Imaging in Cancer: Current Status and Research Directions. Radiology 2011; 261: 700­718.13. Chen Y, Zhong J, Wu H, et al. The clinical application of whole­body diffusion­weighted imaging in the early assessment of chemother­apeutic effects in lymphoma: The initial experience. Magn Reson Imaging 2012; 30: 165­170. 14. Stéphane V, Samuel B, Vincent D, et al. Comparison of PET­CT and magnetic resonance diffusion weighted imaging with body suppres­sion (DWIBS) for initial staging of malignant lymphomas. Eur J Ra­diol 2013; 82: 2011­2017. 15. Frampas E. Lymphomas: Basic points that radiologists should know. Diagn Interv Imaging 2013; 94: 131­144. 16. Mosavi F, Wassberg C, Selling J, et al. Whole­body diffusion­weight­ed MRI and 18F­FDG PET/CT can discriminate between different lymphoma subtypes. Clin Radiol 2015; 70: 1229­1236. 17. Usuda K, Maeda S, Motono N, et al. Diffusion weighted imaging can distinguish benign from malignant mediastinal tumors and mass lesions: Comparison with positron emission tomography. Asian Pacific J Cancer Prev 2015; 16: 6469­6475. 

Application of the apparent diffusion coefficient in magnetic resonance imaging in an assessment of the early response to treatment in Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma : pilot study

https://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/bitstream/handle/item/54619/patyk_kwiatkowski_pawlus_holownia_szymanska_mazur_silicki_badowski_sokolowska-dabek_kuliszkiewicz-janus_zaleska-dorobisz_application_of_the_apparent_diffusion_coefficient_2018.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Application of the apparent diffusion coefficient in magnetic resonance imaging in an assessment of the early response to treatment in Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma : pilot study

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Jagiellonian Univeristy Repository