Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predictive value of pre-treatment apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in radio-chemiotherapy treated head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

  • HEAD, NECK AND DENTAL RADIOLOGY
  • Published:
La radiologia medica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed at evaluating the role of “baseline” apparent diffusion coefficent (ADC), in patients affected by head and neck cancer treated with radio-chemotherapy, as a potential marker of response to therapy.

Methods

Fifty-seven patients underwent pretreatment ADC maps. Minimum, maximum, and medium ADC were computed. Age, dose, treatment time, and ADC values were compared between the two groups (Group 1: local control; Group 2: relapse/persistence of disease) using the Student t test two-tailed unpaired. Two-tailed Fischer exact test was used to compare T stage, N stage, grading and type of treatment between two groups. We have analyzed the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) of statistically significant variables.

Results

In patients with local control, values of pre-treatment medium and minimum ADC were lower than ADC values of patients with persistent or recurrent disease, with values, respectively, of 0.83 ± 0.02 × 10–3 mm2/s and 0.59 ± 0.02 × 10–3 mm2/s (vs 0.94 ± 0.05 × 10–3 mm2/s and 0.70 ± 0.05 × 10–3 mm2/s). ROC curve analysis displayed statistical significance as regarding the medium ADC value, showing a sensitivity of 50% and a specificity of 84.8%. ROC analysis of the values minimum ADC showed a sensitivity of 42.9% and specificity of 87.9%.

Conclusion

The value of the ADC pre-treatment of patients with local control of the disease is lower than that of patients with persistent disease or recurrence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. King AD, Mo FK, Yu KH, Yeung DK, Zhou H, Bhatia KS, Tse GM, Vlantis AC, Wong JK, Ahuja AT (2010) Squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: diffusion-weighted MR imaging for prediction and monitoring of treatment response. Eur Radiol 20:2213–2220

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Berghmans T, Dusart M, Paesmans M, Hossein-Foucher C, Buvat I, Castaigne C, Scherpereel A, Mascaux C, Moreau M, Roelandts M, Alard S, Meert AP, Patz EF Jr, Lafitte JJ, Sculier JP (2008) Primary tumor standardized uptake value (SUVmax) measured on fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) is of prognostic value for survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a systematic review and meta-analysis (MA) by the European Lung Cancer Working Party for the IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project. J Thorac Oncol 3:6–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW (2010) Pelvic lymph node F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake as a prognostic biomarker in newly diagnosed patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Cancer 116:1469–1475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Torizuka T, Tanizaki Y, Kanno T, Futatsubashi M, Naitou K, Ueda Y, Ouchi Y (2009) Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET in patients with head and neck squamous cell cancer. Am J Roentgenol 192:W156–W160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kubicek GJ, Champ C, Fogh S, Wang F, Reddy E, Intenzo C, Dusing RW, Machtay M (2010) FDG-PET staging and importance of lymph node SUV in head and neck cancer. Head Neck Oncol. 2:19

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Moffat BA, Chenevert TL, Lawrence TS, Meyer CR, Johnson TD, Dong Q, Tsien C, Mukherji S, Quint DJ, Gebarski SS, Robertson PL, Junck LR, Rehemtulla A, Ross BD (2005) Functional diffusion map: a noninvasive MRI biomarker for early stratification of clinical brain tumor response. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:5524–5529

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Lee KC, Moffat BA, Schott AF, Layman R, Ellingworth S, Juliar R, Khan AP, Helvie M, Meyer CR, Chenevert TL, Rehemtulla A, Ross BD (2007) Prospective early response imaging biomarker for neoadjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 13:443–450

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McVeigh PZ, Syed AM, Milosevic M, Fyles A, Haider MA (2008) Diffusion-weighted MRI in cervical cancer. Eur Radiol 18:1058–1064

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Thoeny HC, De Keyzer F, King AD (2012) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the head and neck. Radiology 263:19–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ng S-H, Lin C-Y, Chan S-C, Lin Y-C, Yen T-C, Liao C-T, Chang JT, Ko S-F, Wang H-M, Chang C-, Wang J-J (2014) Clinical utility of multimodality imaging with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, diffusion-weighted MRI, and 18F-FDG PET/CT for the prediction of neck control in oropharyngeal or hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with chemoradiation. PLoS One 9(12):e115933

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Hatakenaka M, Nakamura K, Yabuuchi H, Shioyama Y, Matsuo Y, Ohnishi K, Sunami S, Kamitani T, Setoguchi T, Yoshiura T, Nakashima T, Nishikawa K, Honda H (2011) Pretreatment apparent diffusion coefficient of the primary lesion correlates with local failure in head-and-neck cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 81:339–345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kato H, Kanematsu M, Tanaka O, Mizuta K, Aoki M, Shibata T, Yamashita T, Hirose Y, Hoshi H (2009) Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: usefulness of diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the prediction of a neoadjuvant therapeutic effect. Eur Radiol 19:103–109

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim S, Loevner L, Quon H, Sherman E, Weinstein G, Kilger A, Poptani H (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for predicting and detecting early response to chemoradiation therapy of squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck. Clin Cancer Res 15:986–994

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Vandecaveye V, Dirix P, De Keyzer F, Op de Beeck K, Vander Poorten V, Hauben E, Lambrecht M, Nuyts S, Hermans R (2012) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging early after chemoradiotherapy to monitor treatment response in head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82:1098–1107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Zhao M, Pipe JG, Bonnett J, Evelhoch JL (1996) Early detection of treatment response by diffusion-weighted 1H-NMR spectroscopy in a murine tumour in vivo. Br J Cancer 73:61–64

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Chenevert TL, McKeever PE, Ross BD (1997) Monitoring early response of experimental brain tumors to therapy using diffusion magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Cancer Res 3:1457–1466

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gupta RK, Cloughesy TF, Sinha U, Garakian J, Lazareff J, Rubino G, Rubino L, Becker DP, Vinters HV, Alger JR (2000) Relationships between choline magnetic resonance spectroscopy, apparent diffusion coefficient and quantitative histopathology in human glioma. J Neuro-oncol 50:215–226

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Zonari P, Baraldi P, Crisi G (2007) Multimodal MRI in the characterization of glial neoplasms: the combined role of single-voxel MR spectroscopy, diffusion imaging and echo-planar perfusion imaging. Neuroradiology 49:795–803

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hayano K, Okazumi S, Shuto K, Matsubara H, Shimada H, Nabeya Y, Kazama T, Yanagawa N, Ochiai T (2007) Perfusion CT can predict the response to chemoradiation therapy and survival in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: initial clinical results. Oncol Rep 18:901–908

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Garcia M, Jemal A, Ward EM et al (2007) Global cancer facts and figures 2007. American Cancer Society, Atlanta, p 2007

    Google Scholar 

  21. Nagpal JK, Das BR (2003) Oral cancer: reviewing the present understanding of its molecular mechanism and exploring the future directions for its effective management. Oral Oncol 39:213–221

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Maggiore della Carità University Hospital, University of Eastern Piedmont, Corso Mazzini 18, 28100, Novara, Italy

    Mariangela Lombardi, Teresa Cascone, Elena Guenzi, Alessandro Stecco, Francesco Buemi & Alessandro Carriero

  2. Department of Radiotherapy, “Maggiore della Carità” University Hospital, University of Eastern Piedmont, Corso Mazzini 18, 28100, Novara, Italy

    Marco Krengli

Authors
  1. Mariangela Lombardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Teresa Cascone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elena Guenzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alessandro Stecco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Francesco Buemi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Marco Krengli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Alessandro Carriero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mariangela Lombardi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

This paper was accepted at ECR 2016 as online presentation (doi:10.1594/ecr2016/C-0109).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lombardi, M., Cascone, T., Guenzi, E. et al. Predictive value of pre-treatment apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in radio-chemiotherapy treated head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Radiol med 122, 345–352 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-017-0733-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-017-0733-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation