Early detection of ovarian cancer with conventional and contrast-enhanced transvaginal sonography: recent advances and potential improvements

Arthur C Fleischer, Andrej Lyshchik, Makiko Hirari, Ryan D Moore, Richard G Abramson, David A Fishman, Arthur C Fleischer, Andrej Lyshchik, Makiko Hirari, Ryan D Moore, Richard G Abramson, David A Fishman

Abstract

Recently, there have been several major technical advances in the sonographic diagnosis of ovarian cancer in its early stages. These include improved assessment of tumor morphology with transvaginal sonography (TVS), and detection and characterization of tumor neovascularity with transvaginal color Doppler sonography (TV-CDS) and contrast-enhanced transvaginal sonography (CE-TVS). This paper will discuss and illustrate these improvements and describe how they enhance detection of early-stage ovarian cancer. Our initial experience with parametric mapping of CE-TVS will also be mentioned.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Morphologic signs of malignancy with histopathologic correlation on TVS in various histologic types of stage 1A ovarian cancer.
Figure 2
Figure 2
2D CDS of showing flow within papillary excrescence within a papillary cystadenofibroma.
Figure 3
Figure 3
3D TV-CDS of papillary excrescences within a papillary serous cystadenoma.
Figure 4
Figure 4
3D TV-CDS of papillary cystadenocarcinoma showing multiplanar reconstruction (MPR) images.
Figure 5
Figure 5
CE-TVS of a benign fibroma.
Figure 6
Figure 6
CE-TVS of serous cystadenoma with mural nodules.
Figure 7
Figure 7
CE-TVS of borderline mucinous (intestinal) cystadenocarcinoma.
Figure 8
Figure 8
CE-TVS of stage I papillary serous cystadenocarcinoma.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Box graph of contrast-enhanced parameters. While there is no difference in time of peak (T wash-in), there are significant differences in peak enhancement, wash-out time and vascularity ((b), (c); (d)) from [1].
Figure 10
Figure 10
Sensitivities and specificities of maximum enhancement, wash-in, wash-out and area under curve (AUC). Maximum enhancement, wash-out and AUC had greatest accuracy.
Figure 11
Figure 11
Receiver operator characteristerics for (a) wash-in, (b) maximum enhancement, (c) wash-out, and (d) area under curve.
Figure 12
Figure 12
Receiver operator characteristic of various parameters showing cutoff points for vascular index (VI), flow index (FI), and vascular flow index (VFI) (from [2]).
Figure 13
Figure 13
Relative accuracy (sensitivity and specificity of enhancement kinetic parameters) of various techniques using predetermined cutoff points of: 2D VFI (>0.4), 3D VFI (>0.5), CE-TVS (max >17.2 dB), CE-TVS ((1/2)Two > 41 sec), CE-TVS (AUC > 787 s−1).

References

    1. Hirai M, Hirai Y, Tschida T, et al. Comparison of sonographic findings and histopathologic types between patients with normal and elevated serum cancer antigen 125 levels. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2011;30(7):943–952.
    1. Deelman LE, Declèves AE, Rychak JJ, Sharma K. Targeted renal therapies through microbubbles and ultrasound. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 2010;62(14):1369–1377.
    1. Jinawath N, Shih I. Biology and pathology of ovarian cancer. In: Briston R, Armstrong D, editors. Early Diagnosis and Treatment of Cancer. Ovarian Cancer. Philadelphia, Pa, USA: Saunders; 2011. pp. 17–32.
    1. Bazot M, Daraï E, Nassar-Slaba J, Lafont C, Thomassin-Naggara I. Value of magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of ovarian tumors: a review. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography. 2008;32(5):712–723.
    1. Risum S, Hogdall C, Loft A, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT for primary ovarian cancer: a prospective study. Gynecologic Oncology. 2007;105(1):145–149.
    1. Timmerman D. ‘Rules’ for Sonographic Diagnosis of Ovarian Cancer. US O/G 31:681, 2008.
    1. Fleischer AC, Cullinan JA, Peery CV, Jones HW., III Early detection of ovarian carcinoma with transvaginal color Doppler ultrasonography. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1996;174(1):101–106.
    1. Fleischer AC, Milam MR, Crispens MA, Shappell HW. Sonographic depiction of intratumoral vascularity with 2- and 3-dimensional color Doppler techniques. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2005;24(4):533–537.
    1. Fleischer AC, Lyshchik A, Jones HW, et al. Contrast-enhanced transvaginal sonography of benign versus malignant ovarian masses: preliminary findings. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2008;27(7):1011–1018.
    1. Roman LD, Muderspach LI, Stein SM, Laifer-Narin S, Groshen S, Morrow CP. Pelvic examination, tumor marker level, and gray-scale and Doppler sonography in the prediction of pelvic cancer. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1997;89(4):493–500.
    1. Reles A, Wein U, Lichtenegger W. Transvaginal color Doppler sonography and conventional sonography in the preoperative assessment of adnexal masses. Journal of Clinical Ultrasound. 1997;25(5):217–225.
    1. Timmerman D, Testa AC, Bourne T, et al. Simple ultrasound-based rules for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2008;31(6):681–690.
    1. Kinkel K, Hricak H, Lu Y, Tsuda K, Filly RA. US characterization of ovarian masses: a meta-analysis. Radiology. 2000;217(3):803–811.
    1. Marret H, Sauget S, Giraudeau B, et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography helps in discrimination of benign from malignant adnexal masses. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2004;23(12):1629–1639.
    1. Testa AC, Timmerman D, van Belle V, et al. Intravenous contrast ultrasound examination using contrast-tuned imaging (CnTITM) and the contrast medium SonoVue for discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses with solid components. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2009;34(6):699–710.
    1. Anaye A, Perrenoud G, Rognin N, et al. Differentiation of focal liver lesions: usefulness of parametric imaging with contrast-enhanced US. Radiology. 2011;261(1):300–310.
    1. Zhou JH, Zheng W, Cao LH, Liu M. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonic parametric perfusion imaging in the evaluation of antiangiogenic tumor treatment. European Journal of Radiology. In press.
    1. Eisenbrey JR, Dave JK, Merton DA, Palazzo JP, Hall AL, Forsberg F. Parametric imaging using subharmonic signals from ultrasound contrast agents in patients with breast lesions. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2011;30(1):85–92.
    1. Moore RD, Lyshchik A, Fleischer AC. Parametric depiction of contrasted sonography of ovarian masses. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. In press.
    1. Fleischer AC, Lyshchik A, Andreotti RF, Hwang M, Jones HW, III, Fishman DA. Advances in sonographic detection of ovarian cancer: depiction of tumor neovascularity with microbubbles. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2010;194(2):343–348.
    1. Niermann KJ, Fleischer AC, Huamani J, et al. Measuring tumor perfusion in control and treated murine tumors: correlation of microbubble contrast-enhanced sonography to dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2007;26(6):749–756.
    1. Kupesic S, Kurjak A. Contrast-enhanced, three-dimensional power Doppler sonography for differentiation of adnexal masses. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2000;96(3):452–458.
    1. Orden MR, Juvenlin JS, Kirkinien PP. Kinetics of a US contrast agent in benign and malignant adnexal tumors. Radiology. 2003;226:405–410.
    1. Anderson CR, Rychak JJ, Backer M, Backer J, Ley K, Klibanov AL. scVEGF Microbubble ultrasound contrast agents: a novel probe for ultrasound molecular imaging of tumor angiogenesis. Investigative Radiology. 2010;45(10):579–585.
    1. Hwang M, Hariri G, Lyshchik A, Hallahan DE, Fleischer AC. Correlation of quantified contrast-enhanced sonography with in vivo tumor response. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2010;29(4):597–607.
    1. Warram JM, Sorace AG, Saini R, et al. A triple-targeted ultrasound contrast agent provides improved localization to tumor vasculature. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2011;30(7):921–931.
    1. Johnson CA, Miller RJ, O’Brien WJ., Jr. Ultrasound contrast agents affect the angiogenic response. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2011;30(7):933–941.
    1. Tardy I, Pochon S, Theraulaz M, et al. Ultrasound molecular imaging of VEGFR2 in a rat prostate tumor model using BR55. Investigative Radiology. 2010;45(10):573–578.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir