Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in liver metastases of colorectal cancer: reproducibility and biological validation

  • Oncology
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Before diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) can be implemented in standard clinical practice for response monitoring, data on reproducibility are needed to assess which differences outside the range of normal variation can be detected in an individual patient. In this study we assessed the reproducibility of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in colorectal liver metastases. To provide a biological basis for these values, their relation with histopathology was assessed.

Methods

DWI was performed twice in 1 week in patients scheduled for metastasectomy of colorectal liver metastases. Correlation between ADC values and apoptosis marker p53, anti-apoptotic protein BCL-2, proliferation marker Ki67 and serum vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) concentration were assessed.

Results

A good reproducibility coefficient of the mean ADC (coefficient of reproducibility 0.20 × 10−3 mm2/s) was observed in colorectal liver metastases (n = 21). The ADC value was related to the proliferation index and BCL-2 expression of the metastases. Furthermore, in metastases recently treated with systemic therapy, the ADC was significantly higher (1.27 × 10−3 mm2/s vs 1.05 × 10−3 mm2/s, P = 0.02).

Conclusions

The good reproducibility, correlation with histopathology and implied sensitivity for systemic treatment-induced anti-tumour effects suggest that DWI might be an excellent tool to monitor response in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Key Points

• ADC values are becoming important oncological biomarkers

• DWI provides reproducibile ADC values in colorectal liver metastases

• The coefficient of reproducibility of the mean ADC is 0.20 × 10 −3  mm 2 /s

• ADC values correlate with proliferation index and are related to BCL-2 expression

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
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Malvezzi M, Bertuccio P, Levi F, La Vecchia C, Negri E (2012) European cancer mortality predictions for the year 2012. Ann Oncol 23:1044–1052

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Manfredi S, Lepage C, Hatem C, Coatmeur O, Faivre J, Bouvier AM (2006) Epidemiology and management of liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Ann Surg 244:254–259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tol J, Koopman M, Cats A et al (2009) Chemotherapy, bevacizumab, and cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 360:563–572

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Heijmen L, Verstappen MC, Ter Voert EE et al (2012) Tumour response prediction by diffusion-weighted MR imaging: ready for clinical use? Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 83:194-207

    Google Scholar 

  5. Koh DM, Collins DJ (2007) Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:1622–1635

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yablonskiy DA, Sukstanskii AL (2010) Theoretical models of the diffusion weighted MR signal. NMR Biomed 23:661–681

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhang XY, Sun YS, Tang L, Xue WC, Zhang XP (2011) Correlation of diffusion-weighted imaging data with apoptotic and proliferation indexes in CT26 colorectal tumor homografts in balb/c mouse. J Magn Reson Imaging 33:1171–1176

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cui Y, Zhang XP, Sun YS, Tang L, Shen L (2008) Apparent diffusion coefficient: potential imaging biomarker for prediction and early detection of response to chemotherapy in hepatic metastases. Radiology 248:894–900

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dzik-Jurasz A, Domenig C, George M et al (2002) Diffusion MRI for prediction of response of rectal cancer to chemoradiation. Lancet 360:307–308

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mardor Y, Roth Y, Ochershvilli A et al (2004) Pretreatment prediction of brain tumors’ response to radiation therapy using high b-value diffusion-weighted MRI. Neoplasia 6:136–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Herneth AM, Guccione S, Bednarski M (2003) Apparent diffusion coefficient: a quantitative parameter for in vivo tumor characterization. Eur J Radiol 45:208–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Uhl M, Saueressig U, van Buiren M et al (2006) Osteosarcoma: preliminary results of in vivo assessment of tumor necrosis after chemotherapy with diffusion- and perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 41:618–623

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. De Vita F, Orditura M, Lieto E et al (2004) Elevated perioperative serum vascular endothelial growth factor levels in patients with colon carcinoma. Cancer 100:270–278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Galizia G, Lieto E, Ferraraccio F et al (2004) Determination of molecular marker expression can predict clinical outcome in colon carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res 10:3490–3499

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hamstra DA, Galban CJ, Meyer CR et al (2008) Functional diffusion map as an early imaging biomarker for high-grade glioma: correlation with conventional radiologic response and overall survival. J Clin Oncol 26:3387–3394

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kim SH, Lee JY, Lee JM, Han JK, Choi BI (2011) Apparent diffusion coefficient for evaluating tumour response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Eur Radiol 21:2567–2574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Koh DM, Scurr E, Collins D et al (2007) Predicting response of colorectal hepatic metastasis: value of pretreatment apparent diffusion coefficients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:1001–1008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mardor Y, Pfeffer R, Spiegelmann R et al (2003) 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 21:1094–1100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Song I, Kim CK, Park BK, Park W (2010) Assessment of response to radiotherapy for prostate cancer: value of diffusion-weighted MRI at 3T. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:W477–W482

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Desar IM, van Laarhoven HW, Hambrok T et al (2010) Assessment of early vascular effects of the angiogenesis inhibitor sunitinib (SU) in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) by dynamic contrast enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) and diffusion weight MRI (DWI) at 3 tesla (T). ASCO Annual Meeting, June 4-8, 2010, Chicago, IL (abstract)

  21. Kim SY, Lee SS, Byun JH et al (2010) Malignant hepatic tumors: short-term reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficients with breath-hold and respiratory-triggered diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 255:815–823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rademakers SE, Rijken PF, Peeters WJ et al (2011) Parametric mapping of immunohistochemically stained tissue sections; a method to quantify the colocalization of tumor markers. Cell Oncol (Dordr) 34:119–129

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. van Laarhoven HW, Rijpkema M, Punt CJ et al (2003) Method for quantitation of dynamic MRI contrast agent uptake in colorectal liver metastases. J Magn Reson Imaging 18:315–320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hatt M, Cheze-Le Rest C, Aboagye EO et al (2010) Reproducibility of 18F-FDG and 3′-deoxy-3′-18F-fluorothymidine PET tumor volume measurements. J Nucl Med 51:1368–1376

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Munro AJ, Lain S, Lane DP (2005) P53 abnormalities and outcomes in colorectal cancer: a systematic review. Br J Cancer 92:434–444

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Stefanini MO, Wu FT, Mac Gabhann F, Popel AS (2010) Increase of plasma VEGF after intravenous administration of bevacizumab is predicted by a pharmacokinetic model. Cancer Res 70:9886–9894

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Hsei V, Deguzman GG, Nixon A, Gaudreault J (2002) Complexation of VEGF with bevacizumab decreases VEGF clearance in rats. Pharm Res 19:1753–1756

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Nagy JA, Benjamin L, Zeng H, Dvorak AM, Dvorak HF (2008) Vascular permeability, vascular hyperpermeability and angiogenesis. Angiogenesis 11:109–119

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Supported by a grant from the Dutch Cancer Society (KWF Kankerbestrijding), no. KUN 2008-4098.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Oncology 452, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Linda Heijmen & Hanneke W. M. van Laarhoven

  2. Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Edwin E. G. W. ter Voert & Arend Heerschap

  3. Department of Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Johannes H. W. de Wilt

  4. Department of Pathology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Iris D. Nagtegaal

  5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Paul Span & Johan Bussink

  6. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Fred C. G. J. Sweep

  7. Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Cornelis J. A. Punt & Hanneke W. M. van Laarhoven

Authors
  1. Linda Heijmen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edwin E. G. W. ter Voert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Iris D. Nagtegaal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul Span
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Johan Bussink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Cornelis J. A. Punt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Johannes H. W. de Wilt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Fred C. G. J. Sweep
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Arend Heerschap
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Hanneke W. M. van Laarhoven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Linda Heijmen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Heijmen, L., ter Voert, E.E.G.W., Nagtegaal, I.D. et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in liver metastases of colorectal cancer: reproducibility and biological validation. Eur Radiol 23, 748–756 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2654-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2654-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation