La radiologia medica

, Volume 118, Issue 4, pp 534–539 | Cite as

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient value with prognostic parameters

  • Ahmed Abdel Khalek Abdel Razek
  • Elsharawey Kamal
Head and Neck Radiology / Radiologia del Capo e del Collo

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to correlate the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value with the prognostic parameters of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).

Materials and methods

This was a prospective study conducted on 30 consecutive patients (19 men, 11 women; mean age 61 years) with NPC. Patients underwent diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance (DW-MR) singleshot echoplanar imaging at 1.5 Tesla. NPC ADC value was correlated with pathological tumour type, pathological tumour grade, tumour volume and nodal status.

Results

Mean NPC ADC value was 0.99±0.11×10−3mm2/s. ADC values of well-differentiated and moderately differentiated tumours differed significantly (p=0.005) from those of poorly differentiated and undifferentiated NPC. There was also a significant difference in ADC value among small, medium and large tumour volume (p=0.03). ADC value was also significantly lower (p=0.003) when metastatic cervical lymph nodes were present. ADC value correlated inversely with tumour volume (r=−0.799, p=0.03).

Conclusions

ADC value can be considered a noninvasive prognostic parameter that correlates well with prognostic parameters of NPC.

Keywords

Diffusion Nasopharynx Carcinoma MR imaging 

Carcinoma nasofaringeo: correlazione tra il valore del coefficiente apparente di diffusione e i parametri prognostici

Riassunto

Obiettivo

Lo scopo di questo studio è stato quello di correlare il valore del coefficiente apparente di diffusione (ADC) con i parametri prognostici del carcinoma nasofaringeo (NPC).

Materiali e metodi

Questo è stato uno studio prospettico su 30 pazienti consecutivi (19 uomini e 11 donne, con un’età media di 61 anni) con NPC. I pazienti sono stati sottoposti a Risonanza Magnetica a 1,5 Tesla con studio di diffusione usando sequenze ecoplanari single-shot. Il valore di ADC del NPC è stato correlato con il tipo di tumore, il grado, il volume tumorale e lo stato linfonodale.

Risultati

Il valore medio dell’ADC dei NPC è stato 0,99±0,11x10−3mm2/s. I valori di ADC dei tumori ben differenziati e moderatamente differenziati sono stati significativamente diversi (p=0,005) rispetto ai valori degli NPC scarsamente differenziati o indifferenziati. C’è stata anche una differenza significativa nei valori di ADC tra tumori di piccole, medie o grandi dimensioni (p=0,03). I valori di ADC sono inoltre stati significativamente inferiori (p=0,003) in caso di presenza di metastasi linfonodali cervicali. Il valore di ADC dei carcinomi nasofaringei è risultato essere inversamente proporzionale al volume tumorale (r=-0,799, p=0,03).

Conclusioni

Il valore di ADC può essere considerato un parametro prognostico non invasivo che correla con i parametri prognostici per l’NPC.

Parole chiave

Diffusione Nasofaringe Carcinoma RM 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References/Bibliografia

  1. 1.
    King A, Bhatia KS (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging staging of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in the head and neck. World J Radiol 2:159–165PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chong V, Ong C (2008) Nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Eur J Radiol 66:437–447PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lin J (2010) Prognostic factors in nasopharyngeal cancer. In Lu JJ, Cooper JS, Lee AW (eds) Nasopharyngeal Cancer Multidisciplinary Management. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 95–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brandwein-Gensler M, Smith R (2010) Prognostic indicators in head and neck oncology including the new 7th edition of the AJCC staging system. Head and Neck Pathol 4:53–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abdel Razek A (2010) Diffusionweighted magnetic resonance imaging of head and neck. J Comput Assist Tomogr 34:808–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fong D, Bhatia KS, Yeung D et al (2010) Diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for nasopharyngeal carcinoma, head and neck lymphoma and squamous cell carcinoma at the primary site. Oral Oncol 46:603–606PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sumi M, Ichikawa Y, Nakamura T (2007) Diagnostic ability of apparent diffusion coefficients for lymphomas and carcinomas in the pharynx. Eur Radiol 17:2631–2637PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ichikawa Y, Sumi M, Sasaki M et al (2012) Efficacy of diffusion-weighted imaging for the differentiation between lymphomas and carcinomas of the nasopharynx and oropharynx: correlations of apparent diffusion coefficients and histologic features. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 33:761–766PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abdel Razek A, Soliman N, Elkhammary S et al (2006) Role of diffusion-weighted MR imaging in cervical lymphadenopathy. Eur Radiol 16:1468–1477PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    King AD, Ahuja AT, Yeung DK et al (2007) Malignant cervical lymphadenopathy: diagnostic Accuracy of diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 245:806–813PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Abdel Razek A, Kandeel A, Soliman N et al (2007) Role of diffusionweighted echo-planar MR imaging in differentiation of residual or recurrent head and neck tumors and posttreatment changes. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 28:1146–1152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Abdel Razek A, Gaballa G, Denewer A (2010) Invasive ductal carcinoma: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient value with pathological prognostic factors. NMR biomed 23:619–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim S, Cha E, Kim H et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted imaging of breast cancer: correlation of the apparent diffusion coefficient value with prognostic factors. J Magn Reson Imaging 30:615–620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Abdel Razek A, Fathy A, Abdel Gawad T (2011) Correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient value with prognostic parameters of lung cancer. JCAT J Comput Assist Tomogr 35:248–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abdel Razek A, Elkhamary S, Al-Mesfer S et al (2012) Correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient at 3 tesla with prognostic parameters of retinoblastoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 33:944–948PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Barnes L, Eveson JW, Reichart PW et al (2005) World Health Organization Classification of Tumours: Pathology & Genetics Head and Neck Tumours. chapter 2. Lyon, France: IARC Press. Tumours of the nasopharynx, pp. 83–97Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Abdel Razek A, King A (2012) MRI and CT of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentegenol 98:11–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee CC, Huang TT, Lee MS et al (2010) Clinical application of tumor volume in advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma to predict outcome. Radiat Oncol 5:20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sarisahin M, Cila A, Ozyar E et al (2011) Prognostic significance of tumor volume in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Auris Nasus Larynx 38:250–254PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liang SB, Sun Y, Liu LZ et al (2009) Extension of local disease in nasopharyngeal carcinoma detected by magnetic resonance imaging: improvement of clinical target volume delineation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 75:742–750PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chong V, Zhou J, Khoo J et al (2004) Nasopharyngeal carcinoma tumor volume measurement. Radiology 231:914–921PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ng W, Lee A, Kan W et al (2007) N-staging by magnetic resonance imaging for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: pattern of nodal involvement by radiological levels. Radiother Oncol 82:70–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhang G, Liu L, Wei W et al (2010) Retropharyngeal lymph node metastasis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with radiation therapy. Radiology 255:605–612PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmed Abdel Khalek Abdel Razek
    • 1
  • Elsharawey Kamal
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyMansoura Faculty of MedicineMansouraEgypt
  2. 2.Department of ENT and Head and Neck SurgeryMansoura Faculty of MedicineMansouraEgypt

Personalised recommendations