全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

Assessing Response to Radiation Therapy Treatment of Bone Metastases: Short-Term Followup of Radiation Therapy Treatment of Bone Metastases with Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging

DOI: 10.1155/2014/698127

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

This study examined the usefulness of diffusion-weighted (DW) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in monitoring bone metastases response to radiation therapy in 15 oligometastatic patients. For each metastasis, both mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) changes and high b-value DW metastasis/muscle signal intensity ratio (SIR) variations were evaluated at 30 ± 5 days and 60 ± 7 days after the end of treatment. On baseline DW-MRI, all bone metastases were hyperintense and had signal intensities higher than normal bone marrow on calculated ADC maps. At follow-up evaluations, 4 patterns of response were identified: (I) decreased high b-value DW SIR associated with increased mean ADC (83.3% of cases); (II) increased mean ADC with no change of high b-value DW SIR (10% of cases); (III) decreased both high b-value DW SIR and mean ADC (3.3% of cases); (IV) a reduction in mean ADC associated with an increase in high b-value DW SIR compared to pretreatment values (3.3% of cases). Patterns (I) and (II) suggested a good response to therapy; pattern (III) was classified as indeterminate, while pattern (IV) was suggestive of disease progression. This pattern approach may represent a useful tool in the differentiation between treatment-induced necrosis and highly cellular residual tumor. 1. Introduction Bone metastases occur from 30% to 70% of all patients suffering from cancer and commonly involve the axial skeleton [1, 2]. Breast, prostate, and lung cancers represent the main sources of bone metastases, with prostate and lung cancers being most common in males and breast cancer being most common in females [2]. Once bony metastases occur, cancer cure becomes impossible and in these cases radiation therapy, associated or not with systemic chemotherapy, may be performed for palliative intent [1, 3]. Therapy goals are to delay progression, palliate symptoms, improve quality of life, and achieve any possible survival benefit [3]. Currently, there are no universally accepted methods for evaluating the response to treatment, making it difficult to give patient the optimal management to minimize radiation dose and prevent recurrences [1, 3]. Bone scintigraphy (99mTc-methylene diphosphonate-MDP-bone scans) with plain radiographs or cross-sectional imaging, such as Computed Tomography (CT) or Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), and sometimes 18F-fluoride Positron Emission Tomography (PET)/CT remain the commonest imaging methods, complementing one another in order to characterize and follow up bone marrow metastases [1, 3, 4]. Although conventionally used, none of these

References

[1]  W. M. Byun, S. O. Shin, Y. Chang, S. J. Lee, J. Finsterbusch, and J. Frahm, “Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of metastatic disease of the spine: assessment of response to therapy,” American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 906–912, 2002.
[2]  J. Choi and M. Raghavan, “Diagnostic imaging and image-guided therapy of skeletal metastases,” Cancer Control, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 102–112, 2012.
[3]  A. R. Padhani and A. Gogbashian, “Bony metastases: assessing response to therapy with whole-body diffusion MRI,” Cancer Imaging, vol. 11, pp. S129–S145, 2011.
[4]  C. Messiou, D. J. Collins, S. Giles, J. S. de Bono, D. Bianchini, and N. M. de Souza, “Assessing response in bone metastases in prostate cancer with diffusion weighted MRI,” European Radiology, vol. 21, no. 10, pp. 2169–2177, 2011.
[5]  A. Biffar, O. Dietrich, S. Sourbron, H.-R. Duerr, M. F. Reiser, and A. Baur-Melnyk, “Diffusion and perfusion imaging of bone marrow,” European Journal of Radiology, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 323–328, 2010.
[6]  A. R. Padhani, D.-M. Koh, and D. J. Collins, “Whole-body diffusion-weighted MR imaging in cancer: current status and research directions,” Radiology, vol. 261, no. 3, pp. 700–718, 2011.
[7]  N. Nakamura, N. Shikama, H. Wada et al., “Patterns of practice in palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a survey in Japan,” International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, vol. 83, no. 1, pp. e117–e120, 2012.
[8]  L. S. Loftus, S. Edwards-Bennett, and G. H. Sokol, “Systemic therapy for bone metastases,” Cancer Control, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 145–153, 2012.
[9]  G. Colella, S. Cappabianca, G. Gerardi, and F. Mallegni, “Homo neanderthalensis; first documented benign intraosseous tumor in maxillofacial skeleton,” Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 70, no. 2, pp. 373–375, 2012.
[10]  M. Castillo, A. Arbelaez, J. K. Smith, and L. L. Fisher, “Diffusion-weighted MR imaging offers no advantage over routine noncontrast MR imaging in the detection of vertebral metastases,” American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 948–953, 2000.
[11]  C. Ricci, M. Cova, Y. S. Kang et al., “Normal age-related patterns of cellular and fatty bone marrow distribution in the axial skeleton: MR imaging study,” Radiology, vol. 177, no. 1, pp. 83–88, 1990.
[12]  O. Oztekin, E. Ozan, Z. H. Adibelli, G. Unal, and Y. Abali, “SSH-EPI diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the spine with low b values: is it useful in differentiating malignant metastatic tumor infiltration from benign fracture edema?” Skeletal Radiology, vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 651–658, 2009.
[13]  W. M. Byun, S. O. Shin, Y. Chang, S. J. Lee, J. Finsterbusch, and J. Frahm, “Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of metastatic disease of the spine: assessment of response to therapy,” American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 906–912, 2002.
[14]  K. Nakanishi, M. Kobayashi, K. Nakaguchi et al., “Whole-body MRI for detecting metastatic bone tumor: diagnostic value of diffusion-weighted images,” Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 147–155, 2007.
[15]  L.-M. Wu, H.-Y. Gu, J. Zheng et al., “Diagnostic value of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 128–135, 2011.
[16]  A. Baur, A. Huber, B. Ertl-Wagner et al., “Diagnostic value of increased diffusion weighting of a steady-state free precession sequence for differentiating acute benign osteoporotic fractures from pathologic vertebral compression fractures,” American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 366–372, 2001.
[17]  A. Baur, O. Dietrich, and M. Reiser, “Diffusion-weighted imaging of bone marrow: current status,” European Radiology, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 1699–1708, 2003.
[18]  S. Hwang and D. M. Panicek, “Magnetic resonance imaging of bone marrow in oncology, part 1,” Skeletal Radiology, vol. 36, no. 10, pp. 913–920, 2007.
[19]  K. C. Lee, D. A. Bradley, M. Hussain et al., “A feasibility study evaluating the functional diffusion map as a predictive imaging biomarker for detection of treatment response in a patient with metastatic prostate cancer to the bone,” Neoplasia, vol. 9, no. 12, pp. 1003–1011, 2007.
[20]  C. Reischauer, J. M. Froehlich, D.-M. Koh et al., “Bone metastases from prostate cancer: assessing treatment response by using diffusion-weighted imaging and functional diffusion maps—initial observations,” Radiology, vol. 257, no. 2, pp. 523–531, 2010.
[21]  P. Lang, M. F. Wendland, M. Saeed et al., “Osteogenic sarcoma: noninvasive in vivo assessment of tumor necrosis with diffusion-weighted MR imaging,” Radiology, vol. 206, no. 1, pp. 227–235, 1998.

Full-Text

comments powered by Disqus

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133

WeChat 1538708413