title: Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for characterising nasopharyngeal carcinoma: comparison of semiquantitative and quantitative parameters and correlation with tumour stage.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) for characterising nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).
  
  
  METHODS
  Forty-five newly diagnosed NPC patients were recruited. The initial enhancement rate (E R ), contrast transfer rate (k ep ), elimination rate (k el ), maximal enhancement (MaxEn) and initial area under the curve (iAUC) were calculated from semiquantitative analysis. The K (trans) (volume transfer constant), v e (volume fraction) and k ep were calculated from quantitative analysis. Student's t-test was used to evaluate the differences among tumour stages. Pearson's correlation between the two sets of k ep was performed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Comparing tumours of T1/2 stage (n = 18) and T3/4 stage (n = 27), MaxEn (P = 0.030) and iAUC (P = 0.039) were both significantly different; however, the iAUC was the only independent variable with 69.6 % sensitivity and 76.5 % specificity respectively; v e was also significantly different (P = 0.010) with 69.6 % sensitivity and 70.6 % specificity respectively. No significant difference was found among N stages. The two sets of k ep s were highly correlated (r = 0.809, P < 0.001). Forty-three patients had chemoradiation, one palliative chemotherapy and one radiotherapy only. In the four patients with poor outcome, k el, E R, MaxEn and iAUC tended to be higher.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Neovasculature in higher T stage NPC exhibits some parameters of increased permeability and perfusion. Thus, DCE-MRI may be helpful as an adjunctive technique in evaluating NPC.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  • The correct assessment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is important for planning treatment. • Neovasculature in higher T stage NPC exhibits increased permeability and perfusion. • Correlation between quantitative and semi-quantitative analysis validates the robustness of DCE-MRI. • DCE-MRI may be helpful as an adjunctive parameter in evaluating NPC.
authors: Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Hong Kong, Room 406, Block K, Queen Mary Hospital, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
authors: Bingsheng
authors: B
authors: Huang
authors: Chun-Sing
authors: CS
authors: Wong
authors: Brandon
authors: B
authors: Whitcher
authors: Dora Lai-Wan
authors: DL
authors: Kwong
authors: Vincent
authors: V
authors: Lai
authors: Queenie
authors: Q
authors: Chan
authors: Pek-Lan
authors: PL
authors: Khong
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D019540:Area Under Curve; D002277:Carcinoma / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology*; D003287:Contrast Media / Q000494:pharmacology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007091:Image Processing, Computer-Assisted; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D000077274:Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma; D009303:Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology*; D010477:Perfusion; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D013997:Time Factors
chemical_list: D003287:Contrast Media
references: Radiol Med. 2011 Apr;116(3):366-74
references: 21298356
references: Invest Radiol. 2005 Nov;40(11):715-24
references: 16230904
references: J Magn Reson Imaging. 1997 Nov-Dec;7(6):1084-93
references: 9400853
references: Magn Reson Imaging. 2004 Nov;22(9):1201-10
references: 15607091
references: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012 Jul;199(1):169-74
references: 22733909
references: IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2006 Dec;25(12):1627-36
references: 17167997
references: Cancer. 2001 Dec 1;92(11):2845-55
references: 11753958
references: Magn Reson Med. 1991 Feb;17(2):357-67
references: 2062210
references: Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007 Apr;15(2):99-102
references: 17413410
references: Magn Reson Med. 1987 Nov;5(5):399-416
references: 3431401
references: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Apr;192(4):949-55
references: 19304699
references: Br J Cancer. 2005 Mar 14;92(5):799-806
references: 15756250
references: Magn Reson Med. 2008 May;59(5):1183-9
references: 18429032
references: Magn Reson Med. 2007 Mar;57(3):568-76
references: 17326175
references: BMC Med Phys. 2009 Apr 07;9:4
references: 19351382
references: Eur J Radiol. 2012 May;81(5):863-7
references: 21398061
references: Clin Radiol. 2000 Feb;55(2):99-109
references: 10657154
references: Br J Radiol. 1997 May;70(833):446-51
references: 9227224
references: Magn Reson Imaging. 1993;11(5):617-20
references: 8345775
references: Eur Radiol. 2010 Oct;20(10):2358-66
references: 20443116
references: Eur J Radiol. 2012 Apr;81(4):784-8
references: 21376492
references: Clin Imaging. 2005 Sep-Oct;29(5):307-12
references: 16153535
references: Eur Radiol. 2009 Jan;19(1):94-102
references: 18661135
references: Breast J. 1999 Jan;5(1):13-21
references: 11348250
references: Magn Reson Med. 2006 Nov;56(5):993-1000
references: 17036301
references: Radiat Res. 2011 Mar;175(3):291-6
references: 21388272
references: J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999 Sep;10(3):223-32
references: 10508281
references: Phys Med Biol. 2008 Mar 7;53(5):1225-39
references: 18296759