Abstract

Ki-67 proliferation index (PI) is important for providing information on tumor behavior, treatment response, and prognosis. Integrated positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance (PET/MR) may have the potential to assess Ki-67 PI in patients with lung adenocarcinoma. To explore the value of simultaneous 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18 F-FDG) PET/MR-derived parameters in assessing the proliferation status of lung adenocarcinoma and to determine the best combination of parameters. Prospective. Seventy-eight patients with lung adenocarcinoma and with Ki-67 PI. 3.0 T, simultaneous PET/MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and 18 F-FDG PET. DWI-derived parameters, namely, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), true diffusion coefficient (D), pseudo diffusion coefficient (D*), perfusion fraction (f), diffusion heterogeneity index (α), and distributed diffusion coefficient (DDC); and PET-derived parameters, namely, maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax ), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolytic volume (TLG), were calculated and compared between the high (>25%) and low (≤25%) Ki-67 PI groups. The correlations between PET-derived parameters and DWI-derived parameters were analyzed. Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, chi-square test, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. The SUVmax , MTV, TLG, ADC, D, and DDC values were significantly different between the high (N=35) and low Ki-67 PI groups (N=43). D, SUVmax , and MTV independently predicted the Ki-67 PI status. The combination of D, SUVmax , and MTV had the largest area under the ROC curve (AUC=0.900), which was significantly larger than the AUC alone of DDC (AUC=0.725), SUVmax (AUC=0.815), MTV (AUC=0.774), or TLG (AUC=0.783). The perfusion fraction did not correlate with SUVmax , MTV, or TLG (r=-0.03, -0.11, and -0.04, respectively; P=0.786, 0.348, and 0.733). The combination of D, SUVmax , and MTV may predict Ki-67 PI status. No correlation was observed between perfusion parameters and metabolic parameters. 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.