European Radiology

, Volume 27, Issue 12, pp 5056–5063 | Cite as

The diagnostic value of high-frequency power-based diffusion-weighted imaging in prediction of neuroepithelial tumour grading

  • Zhiye Chen
  • Peng Zhou
  • Bin Lv
  • Mengqi Liu
  • Yan Wang
  • Yulin Wang
  • Xin Lou
  • Qiuping Gui
  • Huiguang He
  • Lin Ma
Neuro
  • 160 Downloads

Abstract

Objectives

To retrospectively evaluate the diagnostic value of high-frequency power (HFP) compared with the minimum apparent diffusion coefficient (MinADC) in the prediction of neuroepithelial tumour grading.

Methods

Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) data were acquired on 115 patients by a 3.0-T MRI system, which included b0 images and b1000 images over the whole brain in each patient. The HFP values and MinADC values were calculated by an in-house script written on the MATLAB platform.

Results

There was a significant difference among each group excluding grade I (G1) vs. grade II (G2) (P = 0.309) for HFP and among each group for MinADC. ROC analysis showed a higher discriminative accuracy between low-grade glioma (LGG) and high-grade glioma (HGG) for HFP with area under the curve (AUC) value 1 compared with that for MinADC with AUC 0.83 ± 0.04 and also demonstrated a higher discriminative ability among the G1-grade IV (G4) group for HFP compared with that for MinADC except G1 vs. G2.

Conclusions

HFP could provide a simple and effective optimal tool for the prediction of neuroepithelial tumour grading based on diffusion-weighted images in routine clinical practice.

Key Points

HFP shows positive correlation with neuroepithelial tumour grading.

HFP presents a good diagnostic efficacy for LGG and HGG.

HFP is helpful in the selection of brain tumour boundary.

Keywords

Diffusion-weighted imaging High-frequency power Minimum apparent diffusion coefficient Neuroepithelial tumour grading Magnetic resonance imaging 

Abbreviations

AUC

Area under the curve

DWI

Diffusion-weighted imaging

G1

Grade I

G2

Grade II

G3

Grade III

G4

Grade IV

HFP

High-frequency power

HGG

High-grade glioma

LGG

Low-grade glioma

MinADC

Minimum apparent diffusion coefficient

ROC

Receiver-operating characteristics curve

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Lin Ma.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Funding

This study has received funding from a Special Financial Grant from the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2014 T70960), the Foundation for Medical and Health Science and Technology Innovation Project of Sanya (2016YW37), National Natural Science Foundation of China (91520202) and Youth Innovation Promotion Association CAS.

Statistics and biometry

One of the authors has significant statistical expertise.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was not required for this study because this is a retrospective study, and MRI sequences and diffusion-weighted imaging are routinely performed in clinical practice at our hospital.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• retrospective

• diagnostic or prognostic study

• performed at one institution

Supplementary material

330_2017_4899_MOESM1_ESM.doc (114 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 114 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, Cavenee WK, Burger PC, Jouvet A et al (2007) The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol 114:97–109CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Watanabe M, Tanaka R, Takeda N (1992) Magnetic resonance imaging and histopathology of cerebral gliomas. Neuroradiology 34:463–469CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Felix R, Schorner W, Laniado M, Niendorf HP, Claussen C, Fiegler W et al (1985) Brain tumors: MR imaging with gadolinium-DTPA. Radiology 156:681–688CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Law M, Yang S, Wang H, Babb JS, Johnson G, Cha S et al (2003) Glioma grading: sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of perfusion MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging compared with conventional MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 24:1989–1998PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen WX, Lou HY, Zhang HP, Xiu N, Lan WX, Yang YX et al (2011) Grade classification of neuroepithelial tumors using high-resolution magic-angle spinning proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and pattern recognition. Sci China Life Sci 54:606–616CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Herminghaus S, Dierks T, Pilatus U, Möllerhartmann W, Wittsack J, Marquardt G et al (2003) Determination of histopathological tumor grade in neuroepithelial brain tumors by using spectral pattern analysis of in vivo spectroscopic data. J Neurosurg 98:74–81CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xiao HF, Chen ZY, Lou X, Wang YL, Gui QP, Wang Y et al (2015) Astrocytic tumour grading: a comparative study of three-dimensional pseudocontinuous arterial spin labelling, dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced perfusion-weighted imaging, and diffusion-weighted imaging. Eur Radiol 25:3423–3430CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Di Costanzo A, Pollice S, Trojsi F, Giannatempo GM, Popolizio T, Canalis L et al (2008) Role of perfusion-weighted imaging at 3 Tesla in the assessment of malignancy of cerebral gliomas. Radiol Med 113:134–143CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yan XU, Chen Y, Wang F, Radiology DO (2013) Susceptibility weighted imaging in evaluating the histopathologic grade of cerebral neuroepithelial tumors. J Clin Radiol 32:1388–1393Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sakata A, Okada T, Yamamoto A, Kanagaki M, Fushimi Y, Dodo T et al (2015) Grading glial tumors with amide proton transfer MR imaging: different analytical approaches. J Neuro-Oncol 122:339–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Price SJ, Fryer TD, Cleij MC, Dean AF, Joseph J, Salvador R et al (2009) Imaging regional variation of cellular proliferation in gliomas using 3'-deoxy-3'-[18F]fluorothymidine positron-emission tomography: an image-guided biopsy study. Clin Radiol 64:52–63CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tsuchida T, Takeuchi H, Okazawa H, Tsujikawa T, Fujibayashi Y (2008) Grading of brain glioma with 1-11C-acetate PET: comparison with 18F-FDG PET. Nucl Med Biol 35:171–176CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen Z, Ma L, Lou X, Zhou Z (2010) Diagnostic value of minimum apparent diffusion coefficient values in prediction of neuroepithelial tumor grading. J Magn Reson Imaging 31:1331–1338CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shanbhag SS, Udupi GR, Patil M, Ranganath K (2013) A new method of analysing the intracerebral haemorrhage signal intensity on brain MRI images using frequency domain techniques. J Biomed Sci Eng 06:56–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Torp SH (2002) Diagnostic and prognostic role of Ki67 immunostaining in human astrocytomas using four different antibodies. Clin Neuropathol 21:252–257PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Metz CE (1986) ROC methodology in radiologic imaging. Investig Radiol 21:720–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Doubilet PM (1988) Statistical techniques for medical decision making: applications to diagnostic radiology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 150:745–750CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Park SH, Goo JM, Jo CH (2004) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve: practical review for radiologists. Korean J Radiol 5:11–18CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Metz CE (2006) Receiver operating characteristic analysis: a tool for the quantitative evaluation of observer performance and imaging systems. J Am Coll Radiol 3:413–422CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shanbhag SS, Udupi GR, Patil KM, Ranganath K (2014) Quantitative analysis of diffusion weighted MR images of brain tumor using signal intensity gradient technique. J Med Eng 2014:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhiye Chen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Peng Zhou
    • 3
    • 4
  • Bin Lv
    • 5
  • Mengqi Liu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Yan Wang
    • 1
  • Yulin Wang
    • 1
  • Xin Lou
    • 1
  • Qiuping Gui
    • 6
  • Huiguang He
    • 3
    • 4
    • 7
  • Lin Ma
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyChinese PLA General HospitalBeijingChina
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyHainan Branch of Chinese PLA General HospitalSanyaChina
  3. 3.Research Center for Brain-inspired Intelligence, Institute of AutomationChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  4. 4.University of Chinese Academy of Sciences BeijingChina
  5. 5.Academy of Telecommunication Research of MIITBeijingChina
  6. 6.Department of PathologyChinese PLA General HospitalBeijingChina
  7. 7.Center for Excellence in Brain Science and Intelligence TechnologyChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations