Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The value of diffusion-weighted imaging for monitoring the chemotherapeutic response of osteosarcoma: a comparison between average apparent diffusion coefficient and minimum apparent diffusion coefficient

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The objective of this study was to evaluate whether the average apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) or the minimum ADC is more useful for evaluating the chemotherapeutic response of osteosarcoma.

Materials and methods

Twenty-two patients with osteosarcoma were examined in this study. Diffusion-weighted (DW) and magnetic resonance (MR) images were performed for all patients before and after chemotherapy. The pre- and post-chemotherapy values were obtained both in the average and minimum ADC. The pre-chemotherapy values of the average ADC and minimum ADC respectively were compared with the post-chemotherapy values. In addition, the ADC ratios ([ADCpost - ADCpre] / ADCpre) were calculated using the average ADC and the minimum ADC. Twenty-two patients with osteosarcomas were divided into two groups, those with a good response to chemotherapy (≥ 90% tumor necrosis, n = 7) and those with a poor response (< 90% tumor necrosis, n = 15). The average ADC ratio and the minimum ADC ratio of the two groups were compared.

Results

With both the average ADC and the minimum ADC, post-chemotherapy values were significantly higher than pre-chemotherapy values (P < 0.05). The patients with a good response had a significantly higher minimum ADC ratio than those with a poor response (1.01 ± 0.22 and 0.55 ± 0.29 respectively, P < 0.05). However, with regard to the average ADC ratio, no significant difference was observed between the two groups (0.66 ± 0.18 and 0.46 ± 0.31 respectively, P = 0.19).

Conclusion

The minimum ADC is useful for evaluating the chemotherapeutic response of osteosarcoma.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shen SH, Chiou YY, Wang JH, et al. Diffusion-weighted single-shot echo-planar imaging with parallel technique in assessment of endometrial cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190:481–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gourtsoyianni S, Papanikolaou N, Yarmenitis S, Maris T, Karantanas A, Gourtsoyiannis N. Respiratory gated diffusion-weighted imaging of the liver: value of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in the differentiation between most commonly encountered benign and malignant focal liver lesions. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:486–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Manenti G, Di Roma M, Mancino S, et al. Malignant renal neoplasms: correlation between ADC values and cellularity in diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3 T. Radiol Med. 2008;113:199–213.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hayashida Y, Yakushiji T, Awai K, et al. Monitoring therapeutic responses of primary bone tumors by diffusion-weighted image: initial results. Eur Radiol. 2006;16:2637–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Uhl M, Saueressig U, van Buiren M, et al. Osteosarcoma: preliminary results of in vivo assessment of tumor necrosis after chemotherapy with diffusion- and perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:618–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Murakami R, Sugahara T, Nakamura H, et al. Malignant supratentorial astrocytoma treated with postoperative radiation therapy: prognostic value of pretreatment quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology. 2007;243:493–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Harris AD, Govindaraj M, Frayne R. Minimum detectable difference of MR diffusion maps in acute ischemic stroke. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;27:629–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Kochi M, et al. Usefulness of diffusion-weighted MRI with echo-planar technique in the evaluation of cellularity in gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;9:53–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Provenzale JM, Mukundan S, Barboriak DP. Diffusion-weighted and perfusion MR imaging for brain tumor characterization and assessment of treatment response. Radiology. 2006;239:632–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Picci P, Bacci G, Campanacci M, et al. Histologic evaluation of necrosis in osteosarcoma induced by chemotherapy. Regional mapping of viable and nonviable tumor. Cancer. 1985;56:1515–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. De Baere T, Vanel D, Shapeero LG, Charpentier A, Terrier P, di Paola M. Osteosarcoma after chemotherapy: evaluation with contrast material-enhanced subtraction MR imaging. Radiology. 1992;185:587–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Huvos AG, Rosen G, Marcove RC. Primary osteogenic sarcoma: pathologic aspects in 20 patients after treatment with chemotherapy en bloc resection, and prosthetic bone replacement. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1977;101:14–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bacci G, Longhi A, Versari M, Mercuri M, Briccoli A, Picci P. Prognostic factors for osteosarcoma of the extremity treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: 15-year experience in 789 patients treated at a single institution. Cancer. 2006;106:1154–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rosen G, Marcove RC, Huvos AG, et al. Primary osteogenic sarcoma: eight-year experience with adjuvant chemotherapy. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 1983;106:55–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Holscher HC, Hermans J, Nooy MA, Taminiau AH, Hogendoorn PC, Bloem JL. Can conventional radiographs be used to monitor the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with osteogenic sarcoma? Skeletal Radiol. 1996;25:19–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kumpan W, Lechner G, Wittich GR, et al. The angiographic response of osteosarcoma following pre-operative chemotherapy. Skeletal Radiol. 1986;15:96–102.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Holscher HC, Bloem JL, Vanel D, et al. Osteosarcoma: chemotherapy-induced changes at MR imaging. Radiology. 1992;182:839–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chenevert TL, Stegman LD, Taylor JM, et al. Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging: an early surrogate marker of therapeutic efficacy in brain tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:2029–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mardor Y, Roth Y, Lidar Z, et al. Monitoring response to convection-enhanced taxol delivery in brain tumor patients using diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer Res. 2001;61:4971–3.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mardor Y, Pfeffer R, Spiegelmann R, et al. Early detection of response to radiation therapy in patients with brain malignancies using conventional and high b-value diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1094–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Deng J, Miller FH, Rhee TK, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging for determination of hepatocellular carcinoma response to yttrium-90 radioembolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17:1195–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Theilmann RJ, Borders R, Trouard TP, et al. Changes in water mobility measured by diffusion MRI predict response of metastatic breast cancer to chemotherapy. Neoplasia. 2004;6:831–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. National Cancer Institute sponsored study of classifications of non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas: summary and description of a working formulation for clinical usage—the non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma pathologic classification project. Cancer 1982; 49:2112–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic and Neuro-Musculoskeletal Surgery, Faculty of Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kumamoto University, 1-1-1 Honjo, Kumamoto, Japan, 860-0811

    Kiyoshi Oka, Toshitake Yakushiji, Hiro Sato & Hiroshi Mizuta

  2. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Graduate School of Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kumamoto University, 1-1-1 Honjo, Kumamoto, 860-0811, Japan

    Toshinori Hirai & Yasuyuki Yamashita

Authors
  1. Kiyoshi Oka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Toshitake Yakushiji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hiro Sato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Toshinori Hirai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yasuyuki Yamashita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hiroshi Mizuta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kiyoshi Oka.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Oka, K., Yakushiji, T., Sato, H. et al. The value of diffusion-weighted imaging for monitoring the chemotherapeutic response of osteosarcoma: a comparison between average apparent diffusion coefficient and minimum apparent diffusion coefficient. Skeletal Radiol 39, 141–146 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-009-0830-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-009-0830-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation