Skip to main content

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a pilot study of quantitative perfusion and diffusion-weighted breath-hold magnetic resonance imaging

Abdominal Imaging volume 39, pages 744–752 (2014)Cite this article

An Erratum to this article was published on 19 July 2014

Abstract

Purpose

To confirm the feasibility of breath-hold DCE-MRI and DWI at 3T to obtain the intra-abdominal quantitative physiologic parameters, K trans, k ep, and ADC, in patients with untreated pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas.

Methods

Diffusion-weighted single-shot echo-planar imaging (DW-SS-EPI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI were used for 16 patients with newly diagnosed biopsy-proven pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas. K trans, k ep, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of pancreatic tumors, non-tumor adjacent pancreatic parenchyma (NAP), liver metastases, and normal liver tissues were quantitated and statistically compared.

Results

Fourteen patients were able to adequately hold their breath for DCE-MRI, and 15 patients for DW-SS-EPI. Four patients had liver metastases within the 6 cm of Z axis coverage centered on the pancreatic primary tumors. K trans values (10−3 min−1) of primary pancreatic tumors, NAP, liver metastases, and normal liver tissues were 7.3 ± 4.2 (mean ± SD), 25.8 ± 14.9, 8.1 ± 5.9, and 45.1 ± 15.6, respectively, k ep values (10−2 min−1) were 3.0 ± 0.9, 7.4 ± 3.1, 5.2 ± 2.0, and 12.1 ± 2.8, respectively, and ADC values (10−3 mm2/s) were 1.3 ± 0.2, 1.6 ± 0.3, 1.1 ± 0.1, and 1.3 ± 0.1, respectively. K trans, k ep, and ADC values of primary pancreatic tumors were significantly lower than those of NAP (p < 0.05), while K trans and k ep values of liver metastases were significantly lower than those of normal liver tissues (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

3T breath-hold quantitative physiologic MRI is a feasible technique that can be applied to a majority of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinomas.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Evelhoch J, Garwood M, Vigneron D, et al. (2005) Expanding the use of magnetic resonance in the assessment of tumor response to therapy: workshop report. Cancer Res 65(16):7041–7044. doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-0674

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hoffman JM, Gambhir SS (2007) Molecular imaging: the vision and opportunity for radiology in the future. Radiology 244(1):39–47. doi:10.1148/radiol.2441060773

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sorensen AG (2006) Magnetic resonance as a cancer imaging biomarker. J Clin Oncol 24(20):3274–3281. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.06.6597

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Magee T, Shapiro M, Williams D (2003) Comparison of high-field-strength versus low-field-strength MRI of the shoulder. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181(5):1211–1215. doi:10.2214/ajr.181.5.1811211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Schmitz BL, Aschoff AJ, Hoffmann MH, Gron G (2005) Advantages and pitfalls in 3T MR brain imaging: a pictorial review. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 26(9):2229–2237

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Parker GJ, Roberts C, Macdonald A, et al. (2006) Experimentally-derived functional form for a population-averaged high-temporal-resolution arterial input function for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Mag Reson Med 56(5):993–1000. doi:10.1002/mrm.21066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bali MA, Metens T, Denolin V, et al. (2011) Tumoral and nontumoral pancreas: correlation between quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and histopathologic parameters. Radiology 261(2):456–466. doi:10.1148/radiol.11103515

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kim JH, Lee JM, Park JH, et al. (2013) Solid pancreatic lesions: characterization by using timing bolus dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging assessment: a preliminary study. Radiology 266(1):185–196. doi:10.1148/radiol.12120111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Klein S, Staring M, Murphy K, Viergever MA, Pluim JP (2010) elastix: a toolbox for intensity-based medical image registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 29(1):196–205. doi:10.1109/TMI.2009.2035616

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yao X, Zeng M, Wang H, et al. (2012) Evaluation of pancreatic cancer by multiple breath-hold dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 T. Eur J Radiol 81(8):e917–e922. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.05.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Zulfiqar M, Yousem DM, Lai H (2013) ADC values and prognosis of malignant astrocytomas: does lower ADC predict a worse prognosis independent of grade of tumor?: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200(3):624–629. doi:10.2214/AJR.12.8679

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sun XJ, Quan XY, Huang FH, Xu YK (2005) Quantitative evaluation of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of focal hepatic lesions. World J Gastroenterol: WJG 11(41):6535–6537

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Taouli B, Vilgrain V, Dumont E, et al. (2003) Evaluation of liver diffusion isotropy and characterization of focal hepatic lesions with two single-shot echo-planar MR imaging sequences: prospective study in 66 patients. Radiology 226(1):71–78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jang KM, Kim SH, Lee SJ, et al. (2013) Differentiation of an intrapancreatic accessory spleen from a small (<3 cm) solid pancreatic tumor: value of diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 266(1):159–167. doi:10.1148/radiol.12112765

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rosenkrantz AB, Matza BW, Sabach A, Hajdu CH, Hindman N (2013) Pancreatic cancer: lack of association between apparent diffusion coefficient values and adverse pathological features. Clin Radiol 68(4):e191–e197. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2012.11.006

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dougherty G (2009) Digital image processing for medical applications. New York: Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  17. Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, et al. (1999) Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusible tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging 10(3):223–232. doi:101002/(SICI)1522-2586(199909)10:3<223::AID-JMRI2>3.0.CO;2-S

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Blockley NP, Jiang L, Gardener AG, et al. (2008) Field strength dependence of R1 and R2* relaxivities of human whole blood to ProHance, Vasovist, and deoxyhemoglobin. Magn Reson Med 60(6):1313–1320. doi:10.1002/mrm.21792

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Neter J, Kutner MH, Nachtsheim JC, Wasserman W (1996) Applied linear statistical models, 4th edn. Columbus: The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zwick S, Brix G, Tofts PS, et al. (2010) Simulation-based comparison of two approaches frequently used for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Eur Radiol 20(2):432–442. doi:10.1007/s00330-009-1556-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Heye T, Davenport MS, Horvath JJ, et al. (2013) Reproducibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Part I. Perfusion characteristics in the female pelvis by using multiple computer-aided diagnosis perfusion analysis solutions. Radiology 266(3):801–811. doi:10.1148/radiol.12120278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kudo K, Christensen S, Sasaki M, et al. (2013) Accuracy and reliability assessment of CT and MR perfusion analysis software using a digital phantom. Radiology 267(1):201–211. doi:10.1148/radiol.12112618

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tweedle MF (1997) The ProHance story: the making of a novel MRI contrast agent. Eur Radiol 7(Suppl 5):225–230

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Fukushima N, Koopmann J, Sato N, et al. (2005) Gene expression alterations in the non-neoplastic parenchyma adjacent to infiltrating pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Mod Pathol 18(6):779–787. doi:10.1038/modpathol.3800337

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Matsuki M, Inada Y, Nakai G, et al. (2007) Diffusion-weighed MR imaging of pancreatic carcinoma. Abdom Imaging 32(4):481–483. doi:10.1007/s00261-007-9192-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Balci NC, Momtahen AJ, Akduman EI, et al. (2008) Diffusion-weighted MRI of the pancreas: correlation with secretin endoscopic pancreatic function test (ePFT). Acad Radiol 15(10):1264–1268. doi:10.1016/j.acra.2008.05.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bruegel M, Holzapfel K, Gaa J, et al. (2008) Characterization of focal liver lesions by ADC measurements using a respiratory triggered diffusion-weighted single-shot echo-planar MR imaging technique. Eur Radiol 18(3):477–485. doi:10.1007/s00330-007-0785-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Braithwaite AC, Dale BM, Boll DT, Merkle EM (2009) Short- and midterm reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements at 3.0-T diffusion-weighted imaging of the abdomen. Radiology 250(2):459–465. doi:10.1148/radiol.2502080849

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Yamada I, Aung W, Himeno Y, Nakagawa T, Shibuya H (1999) Diffusion coefficients in abdominal organs and hepatic lesions: evaluation with intravoxel incoherent motion echo-planar MR imaging. Radiology 210(3):617–623. doi:10.1148/radiology.210.3.r99fe17617

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hwang EJ, Cha Y, Lee AL, et al. (2013) Early response evaluation for recurrent high grade gliomas treated with bevacizumab: a volumetric analysis using diffusion-weighted imaging. J Neurooncol 112(3):427–435. doi:10.1007/s11060-013-1072-z

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kim HS, Kim CK, Park BK, Huh SJ, Kim B (2013) Evaluation of therapeutic response to concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with cervical cancer using diffusion-weighted MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging: JMRI 37(1):187–193. doi:10.1002/jmri.23804

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Chopra S, Verma A, Kundu S, et al. (2012) Evaluation of diffusion-weighted imaging as a predictive marker for tumor response in patients undergoing chemoradiation for postoperative recurrences of cervical cancer. J Cancer Res Ther 8(1):68–73. doi:10.4103/0973-1482.95177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Chang YC, Yu CJ, Chen CM, et al. (2012) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer patients treated with first-line bevacizumab, gemcitabine, and cisplatin. J Magn Reson Imaging: JMRI 36(2):387–396. doi:10.1002/jmri.23660

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Chikui T, Kitamoto E, Kawano S, et al. (2012) Pharmacokinetic analysis based on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for evaluating tumor response to preoperative therapy for oral cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging: JMRI 36(3):589–597. doi:10.1002/jmri.23704

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kim JH, Kim CK, Park BK, et al. (2012) Dynamic contrast-enhanced 3-T MR imaging in cervical cancer before and after concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Eur Radiol 22(11):2533–2539. doi:10.1007/s00330-012-2504-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Grant support

Research Initiative Pilot Award from the Department of Radiology at UAB and NIH grant 2P30CA013148.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294-0019, USA

    Hyunki Kim & Desiree E. Morgan

  2. Biomedical Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294-0019, USA

    Hyunki Kim

  3. Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294-0019, USA

    John Christein & Martin J. Heslin

  4. Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294-0019, USA

    James A. Posey III

  5. Department of Biostatistics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294-0019, USA

    T. Mark Beasley

  6. Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294-0019, USA

    Hyunki Kim & Desiree E. Morgan

  7. The Center for Specialized Surgery, Orlando, FL, 32804, Philips

    Pablo J. Arnoletti

  8. Medical Systems, Bothell, WA, 98021, USA

    Amol Pednekar

  9. G082 Volker Hall 1720 2nd Avenue South, Birmingham, AL, 35294-0019, USA

    Hyunki Kim

Authors
  1. Hyunki Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pablo J. Arnoletti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John Christein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Martin J. Heslin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. James A. Posey III
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Amol Pednekar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. T. Mark Beasley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Desiree E. Morgan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hyunki Kim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kim, H., Arnoletti, P.J., Christein, J. et al. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a pilot study of quantitative perfusion and diffusion-weighted breath-hold magnetic resonance imaging. Abdom Imaging 39, 744–752 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0107-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0107-z

Keywords

  • DCE-MRI
  • DWI
  • Pancreatic adenocarcinoma