1
|
Vulasala SS, Virarkar M, Karbasian N, Calimano-Ramirez LF, Daoud T, Amini B, Bhosale P, Javadi S. Whole-body MRI in oncology: A comprehensive review. Clin Imaging 2024; 108:110099. [PMID: 38401295 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2024.110099] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2023] [Revised: 01/28/2024] [Accepted: 01/31/2024] [Indexed: 02/26/2024]
Abstract
Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging (WB-MRI) has cemented its position as a pivotal tool in oncological diagnostics. It offers unparalleled soft tissue contrast resolution and the advantage of sidestepping ionizing radiation. This review explores the diverse applications of WB-MRI in oncology. We discuss its transformative role in detecting and diagnosing a spectrum of cancers, emphasizing conditions like multiple myeloma and cancers with a proclivity for bone metastases. WB-MRI's capability to encompass the entire body in a singular scan has ushered in novel paradigms in cancer screening, especially for individuals harboring hereditary cancer syndromes or at heightened risk for metastatic disease. Additionally, its contribution to the clinical landscape, aiding in the holistic management of multifocal and systemic malignancies, is explored. The article accentuates the technical strides achieved in WB-MRI, its myriad clinical utilities, and the challenges in integration into standard oncological care. In essence, this review underscores the transformative potential of WB-MRI, emphasizing its promise as a cornerstone modality in shaping the future trajectory of cancer diagnostics and treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sai Swarupa Vulasala
- Department of Radiology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL, United States.
| | - Mayur Virarkar
- Department of Radiology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL, United States
| | - Niloofar Karbasian
- Department of Radiology, McGovern Medical School at University of Texas Health Houston, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Luis F Calimano-Ramirez
- Department of Radiology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL, United States
| | - Taher Daoud
- Division of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Behrang Amini
- Division of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Priya Bhosale
- Division of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Sanaz Javadi
- Division of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ingenerf M, Rübenthaler J, Wenter V, Zacherl M, Völter F, Winkelmann M, Karim H, Schinner R, Ricke J, Berger F, Schmid-Tannwald C. Evaluation of MRI in the diagnostic accuracy of extrahepatic metastases in neuroendocrine tumors in comparison with the reference standard somatostatin-receptor-PET/CT. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1194152. [PMID: 37655102 PMCID: PMC10465364 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1194152] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2023] [Accepted: 07/20/2023] [Indexed: 09/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of different sets of MR sequences in detecting extrahepatic disease of NETs on routine liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Method One hundred twenty-seven patients with NETs with and without hepatic and extrahepatic metastases who underwent liver MRI and SSTR-PET/CT were retrospectively analyzed. Two radiologists evaluated in consensus in four sessions: (1) non-contrast T1w+T2w (NC), (2) NC+DWI, (3) NC+ contrast-enhanced T1w (CE), and (4) NC+DWI+CE the presence and number of metastases (lymph nodes, bone, peritoneal surface, lung base, and abdominal organ). Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive value for detection of metastases were calculated for each session in a patient-based manner; detection and error rates were calculated for lesion-based analysis. Comparison between the MR-sessions and positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) was performed with the McNemar test. Results Regarding all 1,094 lesions detected in PET/CT, NC+DWI, and NC, CE+DWI identified most true-positive lesions 779 (71%) and 775 (71%), respectively. Patient-based analysis revealed significantly higher sensitivity by NC+DWI (85%) than NC and NC+CE (p = 0.011 and 0.004, respectively); the highest specificity was reached by NC+CE+DWI (100%). Site-based analysis revealed highest detection rates for lymph node metastases for NC+DWI and NC, CE+DWI (73 and 76%, respectively); error rates were lower for NC, CE+DWI with 5% compared with 17% (NC+DWI). Detection rates for bone metastases were similarly high in NC+DWI and NC, CE+DWI (75 and 74%, respectively), while CE showed no benefit. For peritoneal metastases highest sensitivity was reached by NC+DWI (67%). Conclusion The combination of NC+DWI showed better sensitivities than the combination of NC+CE. NC+DWI showed similar, sometimes even better sensitivities than NC+CE+DWI, but with lower specificities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Ingenerf
- Department of Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Johannes Rübenthaler
- Department of Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Vera Wenter
- European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) Centre of Excellence, Interdisciplinary Center of Neuroendocrine Tumours of the GastroEnteroPancreatic System at at the University Hospital of Munich (GEPNET-KUM), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Mathias Zacherl
- European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) Centre of Excellence, Interdisciplinary Center of Neuroendocrine Tumours of the GastroEnteroPancreatic System at at the University Hospital of Munich (GEPNET-KUM), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Friederike Völter
- European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) Centre of Excellence, Interdisciplinary Center of Neuroendocrine Tumours of the GastroEnteroPancreatic System at at the University Hospital of Munich (GEPNET-KUM), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Michael Winkelmann
- Department of Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Homeira Karim
- Department of Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Regina Schinner
- Department of Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Jens Ricke
- Department of Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Frank Berger
- Department of Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Christine Schmid-Tannwald
- Department of Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Reinert CP, Liang C, Weissinger M, Vogel J, Forschner A, Nikolaou K, la Fougère C, Seith F. Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) for Staging Melanoma Patients in Direct Comparison to Computed Tomography (CT): Results from a Prospective Positron Emission Tomography (PET)/CT and PET/MRI Study. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13:diagnostics13111963. [PMID: 37296815 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13111963] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2023] [Revised: 05/16/2023] [Accepted: 05/31/2023] [Indexed: 06/12/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The consideration of radiation exposure is becoming more important in metastatic melanoma due to improved prognoses. The aim of this prospective study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of whole-body (WB) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in comparison to computed tomography (CT) with 18F-FDG positron emission tomography (PET)/CT and 18F-PET/MRI together with a follow-up as the reference standard. METHODS Between April 2014 and April 2018, a total of 57 patients (25 females, mean age of 64 ± 12 years) underwent WB-PET/CT and WB-PET/MRI on the same day. The CT and MRI scans were independently evaluated by two radiologists who were blinded to the patients' information. The reference standard was evaluated by two nuclear medicine specialists. The findings were categorized into different regions: lymph nodes/soft tissue (I), lungs (II), abdomen/pelvis (III), and bone (IV). A comparative analysis was conducted for all the documented findings. Inter-reader reliability was assessed using Bland-Altman procedures, and McNemar's test was utilized to determine the differences between the readers and the methods. RESULTS Out of the 57 patients, 50 were diagnosed with metastases in two or more regions, with the majority being found in region I. The accuracies of CT and MRI did not show significant differences, except in region II where CT detected more metastases compared to MRI (0.90 vs. 0.68, p = 0.008). On the other hand, MRI had a higher detection rate in region IV compared to CT (0.89 vs. 0.61, p > 0.05). The level of agreement between the readers varied depending on the number of metastases and the specific region, with the highest agreement observed in region III and the lowest observed in region I. CONCLUSIONS In patients with advanced melanoma, WB-MRI has the potential to serve as an alternative to CT with comparable diagnostic accuracy and confidence across most regions. The observed limited sensitivity for the detection of pulmonary lesions might be improved through dedicated lung imaging sequences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian Philipp Reinert
- Department of Radiology, Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
| | - Cecilia Liang
- Department of Radiology, Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
| | - Matthias Weissinger
- Department of Radiology, Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
- Department of Nuclear Medicine and Clinical Molecular Imaging, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
| | - Jonas Vogel
- Department of Radiology, Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
- Department of Nuclear Medicine and Clinical Molecular Imaging, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
| | - Andrea Forschner
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tübingen, Liebermeisterstrasse 25, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
| | - Konstantin Nikolaou
- Department of Radiology, Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
- Cluster of Excellence iFIT (EXC 2180) "Image Guided and Functionally Instructed Tumor Therapies", University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
| | - Christian la Fougère
- Department of Nuclear Medicine and Clinical Molecular Imaging, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
- Cluster of Excellence iFIT (EXC 2180) "Image Guided and Functionally Instructed Tumor Therapies", University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
| | - Ferdinand Seith
- Department of Radiology, Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Imaging of Oligometastatic Disease. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14061427. [PMID: 35326586 PMCID: PMC8946296 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14061427] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2022] [Revised: 03/03/2022] [Accepted: 03/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary The imaging of oligometastatic disease (OMD) is challenging as it requires precise loco-regional staging and whole-body assessment. The combination of imaging modalities is often required. The more accurate imaging tool will be selected according to tumor type, the timing with regard to measurement and treatment, metastatic location, and the patient’s individual risk for metastasis. The most commonly used modalities are contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging and metabolic and receptor-specific imaging, particularly, 18F-fluorodesoxyglucose positron emission tomography/CT, used alone or in combination. Abstract Oligometastatic disease (OMD) is an emerging state of disease with limited metastatic tumor burden. It should be distinguished from polymetastatic disease due the potential curative therapeutic options of OMD. Imaging plays a pivotal role in the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with OMD. The imaging tools needed in the case of OMD will differ according to different parameters, which include primary tumor type, timing between measurement and treatment, potential metastatic location and the patient’s individual risk for metastasis. In this article, OMD is defined and the use of different imaging modalities in several oncologic situations are described in order to better understand OMD and its specific implication for radiologists.
Collapse
|