利用定量弥散加权成像对宫颈癌进行多中心研究。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Acta radiologica Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-09 DOI:10.1177/02841851231222360
Xue Wang, Zhijun Ye, Shujian Li, Zhihan Yan, Jingliang Cheng, Gang Ning, Zujun Hou
{"title":"利用定量弥散加权成像对宫颈癌进行多中心研究。","authors":"Xue Wang, Zhijun Ye, Shujian Li, Zhihan Yan, Jingliang Cheng, Gang Ning, Zujun Hou","doi":"10.1177/02841851231222360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Parameters from diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) have been increasingly used as imaging biomarkers for the diagnosis and monitoring of treatment responses in cancer. The consistency of DWI measurements across different centers remains uncertain, which limits the widespread use of quantitative DWI in clinical settings.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To investigate the consistency of quantitative metrics derived from DWI between different scanners in a multicenter clinical setting.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A total of 193 patients with cervical cancer from four scanners (MRI1, MRI2, MRI3, and MRI4) at three centers were included in this retrospective study. DWI data were processed using the mono-exponential and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) model, yielding the following parameters: apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC); true diffusion coefficient (D); pseudo-diffusion coefficient (D*); perfusion fraction (f); and the product of f and D* (fD*). Various parameters of cervical cancer obtained from different scanners were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The parameters D and ADC derived from MRI1 and MRI2 were significantly different from those derived from MRI3 or MRI4 (<i>P</i> <0.01 for all comparisons). However, there was no significant difference in cervical cancer perfusion parameters (D* and fD*) between the different scanners (<i>P</i> >0.05). The <i>P</i> values of comparisons of all DWI parameters (D, D*, fD*, and ADC) between MRI3 and MRI4 (same vendor in different centers) for cervical cancer were all >0.05, except for f (<i>P</i> = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Scanners of the same model by the same vendor can yield close measurements of the ADC and IVIM parameters. The perfusion parameters showed higher consistency among the different scanners.</p>","PeriodicalId":7143,"journal":{"name":"Acta radiologica","volume":" ","pages":"851-859"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11295415/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A multicenter study of cervical cancer using quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging.\",\"authors\":\"Xue Wang, Zhijun Ye, Shujian Li, Zhihan Yan, Jingliang Cheng, Gang Ning, Zujun Hou\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02841851231222360\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Parameters from diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) have been increasingly used as imaging biomarkers for the diagnosis and monitoring of treatment responses in cancer. The consistency of DWI measurements across different centers remains uncertain, which limits the widespread use of quantitative DWI in clinical settings.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To investigate the consistency of quantitative metrics derived from DWI between different scanners in a multicenter clinical setting.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A total of 193 patients with cervical cancer from four scanners (MRI1, MRI2, MRI3, and MRI4) at three centers were included in this retrospective study. DWI data were processed using the mono-exponential and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) model, yielding the following parameters: apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC); true diffusion coefficient (D); pseudo-diffusion coefficient (D*); perfusion fraction (f); and the product of f and D* (fD*). Various parameters of cervical cancer obtained from different scanners were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The parameters D and ADC derived from MRI1 and MRI2 were significantly different from those derived from MRI3 or MRI4 (<i>P</i> <0.01 for all comparisons). However, there was no significant difference in cervical cancer perfusion parameters (D* and fD*) between the different scanners (<i>P</i> >0.05). The <i>P</i> values of comparisons of all DWI parameters (D, D*, fD*, and ADC) between MRI3 and MRI4 (same vendor in different centers) for cervical cancer were all >0.05, except for f (<i>P</i> = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Scanners of the same model by the same vendor can yield close measurements of the ADC and IVIM parameters. The perfusion parameters showed higher consistency among the different scanners.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7143,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta radiologica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"851-859\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11295415/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta radiologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02841851231222360\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta radiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02841851231222360","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:弥散加权成像(DWI)参数已越来越多地被用作诊断和监测癌症治疗反应的成像生物标志物。不同中心的 DWI 测量结果的一致性仍不确定,这限制了定量 DWI 在临床环境中的广泛应用。目的:在多中心临床环境中研究不同扫描仪的 DWI 定量指标的一致性:这项回顾性研究共纳入了三个中心四台扫描仪(MRI1、MRI2、MRI3 和 MRI4)的 193 名宫颈癌患者。采用单指数和体素内不连贯运动(IVIM)模型处理 DWI 数据,得出以下参数:表观扩散系数(ADC);真实扩散系数(D);假扩散系数(D*);灌注分数(f);以及 f 与 D* 的乘积(fD*)。对不同扫描仪获得的宫颈癌各种参数进行了比较:结果:核磁共振成像 1 和核磁共振成像 2 得出的 D 和 ADC 参数与核磁共振成像 3 或核磁共振成像 4 得出的参数有显著差异(P P >0.05)。宫颈癌 MRI3 和 MRI4(不同中心的同一供应商)的所有 DWI 参数(D、D*、fD* 和 ADC)比较的 P 值均大于 0.05,但 f 除外(P = 0.05):结论:同一供应商生产的同型号扫描仪可以测量出接近的 ADC 和 IVIM 参数。不同扫描仪的灌注参数一致性更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A multicenter study of cervical cancer using quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging.

Background: Parameters from diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) have been increasingly used as imaging biomarkers for the diagnosis and monitoring of treatment responses in cancer. The consistency of DWI measurements across different centers remains uncertain, which limits the widespread use of quantitative DWI in clinical settings.

Purpose: To investigate the consistency of quantitative metrics derived from DWI between different scanners in a multicenter clinical setting.

Material and methods: A total of 193 patients with cervical cancer from four scanners (MRI1, MRI2, MRI3, and MRI4) at three centers were included in this retrospective study. DWI data were processed using the mono-exponential and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) model, yielding the following parameters: apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC); true diffusion coefficient (D); pseudo-diffusion coefficient (D*); perfusion fraction (f); and the product of f and D* (fD*). Various parameters of cervical cancer obtained from different scanners were compared.

Results: The parameters D and ADC derived from MRI1 and MRI2 were significantly different from those derived from MRI3 or MRI4 (P <0.01 for all comparisons). However, there was no significant difference in cervical cancer perfusion parameters (D* and fD*) between the different scanners (P >0.05). The P values of comparisons of all DWI parameters (D, D*, fD*, and ADC) between MRI3 and MRI4 (same vendor in different centers) for cervical cancer were all >0.05, except for f (P = 0.05).

Conclusion: Scanners of the same model by the same vendor can yield close measurements of the ADC and IVIM parameters. The perfusion parameters showed higher consistency among the different scanners.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta radiologica
Acta radiologica 医学-核医学
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
170
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Radiologica publishes articles on all aspects of radiology, from clinical radiology to experimental work. It is known for articles based on experimental work and contrast media research, giving priority to scientific original papers. The distinguished international editorial board also invite review articles, short communications and technical and instrumental notes.
期刊最新文献
A combined model integrating radiomics and deep learning based on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for classification of brain metastases. Anatomical insights into medial-sided talar dome osteochondral lesions: a comparative analysis of unilateral and bilateral cases and healthy controls using MRI measurements. Can smartphone cameras help with diagnostic adequacy in renal biopsy? Factors related to acute kidney injury after AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy. MR defecography: comparison of HMO system measurement between supine and lateral decubitus patient position.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1