Improving tumour heterogeneity MRI assessment with histograms

N Just, N Just

Abstract

By definition, tumours are heterogeneous. They are defined by marked differences in cells, microenvironmental factors (oxygenation levels, pH, VEGF, VPF and TGF-α) metabolism, vasculature, structure and function that in turn translate into heterogeneous drug delivery and therapeutic outcome. Ways to estimate quantitatively tumour heterogeneity can improve drug discovery, treatment planning and therapeutic responses. It is therefore of paramount importance to have reliable and reproducible biomarkers of cancerous lesions' heterogeneity. During the past decade, the number of studies using histogram approaches increased drastically with various magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques (DCE-MRI, DWI, SWI etc.) although information on tumour heterogeneity remains poorly exploited. This fact can be attributed to a poor knowledge of the available metrics and of their specific meaning as well as to the lack of literature references to standardised histogram methods with which surrogate markers of heterogeneity can be compared. This review highlights the current knowledge and critical advances needed to investigate and quantify tumour heterogeneity. The key role of imaging techniques and in particular the key role of MRI for an accurate investigation of tumour heterogeneity is reviewed with a particular emphasis on histogram approaches and derived methods.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Interpretation of the properties of histograms. (A). Definition of mean, median and percentiles. P25=25th percentile; P75=75th percentile. (B). Kurtosis (K) Platykurtosis indicates a flatter peak with negative kurtosis (left, K<0), and leptokurtosis indicates a sharp peak with positive kurtosis (Right, K>0). Skewness: if a histogram has an elongated tail on the left side of the mean, it is negatively skewed. If a histogram has an elongated tail on the right side of the mean, it is positively skewed.

References

    1. Ahn SJ, Choi SH, Kim YJ, Kim KG, Sohn CH, Han MH, Chang KH, Min HS. Histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient map of standard and high B-value diffusion MR imaging in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a correlation study with histological grade. Acad Radiol. 2012;19:1233–1240.
    1. Baek HJ, Kim HS, Kim N, Choi YJ, Kim YJ. Percent change of perfusion skewness and kurtosis: a potential imaging biomarker for early treatment response in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastomas. Radiology. 2012;264:834–843.
    1. Burrell JS, Bradley RobertS, Walker-Samuel Simon, Jamin Yann, Baker LaurenCJ, Boult JessicaKR, Withers PhilipJ, Halliday Jane, Waterton JohnC, Robinson SimonP. MRI measurements of vessel calibre in tumor xenografts: Comparison with vascular corrosion casting. Microvasc Res. 2012;84:323–329.
    1. Carter JS, Koopmeiners JS, Kuehn-Hajder JE, Metzger GJ, Lakkadi N, Downs LS, Jr, Bolan PJ. Quantitative multiparametric MRI of ovarian cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;38:1501–1509.
    1. Chandarana H, Rosenkrantz AB, Mussi TC, Kim S, Ahmad AA, Raj SD, McMenamy J, Melamed J, Babb JS, Kiefer B, Kiraly AP. Histogram analysis of whole-lesion enhancement in differentiating clear cell from papillary subtype of renal cell cancer. Radiology. 2012;265:790–798.
    1. Chang YC, Huang CS, Liu YJ, Chen JH, Lu YS, Tseng WY. Angiogenic response of locally advanced breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy evaluated with parametric histogram from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Phys Med Biol. 2004;49:3593–3602.
    1. Choi YJ, Kim HS, Jahng GH, Kim SJ, Suh DC. Pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma: added value of arterial spin labeling to dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging. Acta Radiol. 2013;54 (4:448–454.
    1. Crokart N, Radermacher K, Jordan BF, Baudelet C, Cron GO, Grégoire V, Beghein N, Bouzin C, Feron O, Gallez B. Tumor radiosensitization by anti-inflammatory drugs: evidence for a new mechanism involving the oxygen effect. Cancer Res. 2005;65:7911–7916.
    1. De Sousa EMF, Vermeulen L, Fessler E, Medema JP. Cancer heterogeneity—a multifaceted view. EMBO Rep. 2013;14 (8:686–695.
    1. Downey K, Riches SF, Morgan VA, Giles SL, Attygalle AD, Ind TE, Barton DP, Shepherd JH, deSouza NM. Relationship between imaging biomarkers of stage I cervical cancer and poor-prognosis histologic features: quantitative histogram analysis of diffusion-weighted MR images. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:314–320.
    1. Eliat PA, Olivié D, Saïkali S, Carsin B, Saint-Jalmes H, de Certaines JD. Can dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging combined with texture analysis differentiate malignant glioneuronal tumors from other glioblastoma. Neurol Res Int. 2012;2012:195176.
    1. Foroutan P, Kreahling JM, Morse DL, Grove O, Lloyd MC, Reed D, Raghavan M, Altiok S, Martinez GV, Gillies RJ. Diffusion MRI and novel texture analysis in osteosarcoma xenotransplants predicts response to anti-checkpoint therapy. PLoS One. 2013;8 (12:e82875.
    1. Friedman SN, Bambrough PJ, Kotsarini C, Khandanpour N, Hoggard N. Semi-automated and automated glioma grading using dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI relative cerebral blood volume measurements. Br J Radiol. 2012;85:e1204–e1211.
    1. Hayes C, Padhani AR, Leach MO. Assessing changes in tumor vascular function using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. NMR Biomed. 2002;15:154–163.
    1. Howe FA, McPhail LD, Griffiths JR, McIntyre DJ, Robinson SP. Vessel size index magnetic resonance imaging to monitor the effect of antivascular treatment in a rodent tumor model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;71:1470–1476.
    1. Johansen R, Jensen L, Rydland J, Goa PE, Kvistad KA, Bathen TF, Axelson DE, Lundgren S, Gribbestad IS. Predicting survival and early clinical response to primary chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced breast cancer using DCE-MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009;29:1300–1307.
    1. Jordan BF, Runquist M, Raghunand N, Gillies RJ, Tate WR, Powis G, Baker AF. The thioredoxin-1 inhibitor 1-methylpropyl 2-imidazolyl disulfide (PX-12) decreases vascular permeability in tumor xenografts monitored by dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:529–536.
    1. Just N. Histogram analysis of the microvasculature of intracerebral human and murine glioma xenografts. Magn Reson Med. 2011;65:778–789.
    1. Kim H, Choi SH, Kim JH, Ryoo I, Kim SC, Yeom JA, Shin H, Jung SC, Lee AL, Yun TJ, Park CK, Sohn CH, Park SH. Gliomas: application of cumulative histogram analysis of normalized cerebral blood volume on 3T MRI to tumor grading. PLoS One. 2013;21:e63462.
    1. King AD, Chow KK, Yu KH, Mo FK, Yeung DK, Yuan J, Bhatia KS, Vlantis AC, Ahuja AT. Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for the prediction of treatment response. Radiology. 2013;266:531–538.
    1. Kyriazi S, Collins DJ, Messiou C, Pennert K, Davidson RL, Giles SL, Kaye SB, Desouza NM. Metastatic ovarian and primary peritoneal cancer: assessing chemotherapy response with diffusion-weighted MR imaging—value of histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficients. Radiology. 2011;261:182–192.
    1. Leach MO, Brindle KM, Evelhoch JL, Griffiths JR, Horsman MR, Jackson A, Jayson GC, Judson IR, Knopp MV, Maxwell RJ, McIntyre D, Padhani AR, Price P, Rathbone R, Rustin GJ, Tofts PS, Tozer GM, Vennart W, Waterton JC, Williams SR, Workman P, Pharmacodynamic/Pharmacokinetic Technologies Advisory Committee, Drug Development Office, Cancer Research UK The assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapies in early-stage clinical trials using magnetic resonance imaging: issues and recommendations. Br J Cancer. 2005;92 (9:1599–1610.
    1. Li KL, Wilmes LJ, Henry RG, Pallavicini MG, Park JW, Hu-Lowe DD, McShane TM, Shalinsky DR, Fu YJ, Brasch RC, Hylton NM. Heterogeneity in the angiogenic response of a BT474 human breast cancer to a novel vascular endothelial growth factor-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor: assessment by voxel analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2005;22:511–519.
    1. Mignion L, Dutta P, Martinez GV, Foroutan P, Gillies RJ, Jordan BF. Monitoring chemotherapeutic response by hyperpolarized 13C-fumarate MRS and diffusion MRI. Cancer Res. 2014;74 (3:686–694.
    1. Nowosielski M, Recheis W, Goebel G, Güler O, Tinkhauser G, Kostron H, Schocke M, Gotwald T, Stockhammer G, Hutterer M. ADC histograms predict response to anti-angiogenic therapy in patients with recurrent high-grade glioma. Neuroradiology. 2011;53:291–302.
    1. Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM, Chenevert TL, Thoeny HC, Takahara T, Dzik-Jurasz A, Ross BD, Van Cauteren M, Collins D, Hammoud DA, Rustin GJ, Taouli B, Choyke PL. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia. 2009;11:102–125.
    1. Padhani AR. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in clinical oncology: current status and future directions. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002;16:407–422.
    1. Peng SL, Chen CF, Liu HL, Lui CC, Huang YJ, Lee TH, Chang CC, Wang FN. Analysis of parametric histogram from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: application in evaluating brain tumor response to radiotherapy. NMR Biomed. 2012;26:443–450.
    1. Robinson SP, Rijken PF, Howe FA, McSheehy PM, van der Sanden BP, Heerschap A, Stubbs M, van der Kogel AJ, Griffiths JR. Tumor vascular architecture and function evaluated by non-invasive susceptibility MRI methods and immunohistochemistry. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;17:445–454.
    1. Rodriguez Gutierrez D, Awwad A, Meijer L, Manita M, Jaspan T, Dineen RA, Grundy RG, Auer DP. Metrics and textural features of mri diffusion to improve classification of pediatric posterior fossa tumors. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014;35 (5:1009–1015.
    1. Rose CJ, Mills SJ, O'Connor JP, Buonaccorsi GA, Roberts C, Watson Y, Cheung S, Zhao S, Whitcher B, Jackson A, Parker GJ. Quantifying spatial heterogeneity in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameter maps. Magn Reson Med. 2009;62 (2:488–499.
    1. Rose CJ, O'Connor JP, Cootes TF, Taylor CJ, Jayson GC, Parker GJ, Waterton JC. Indexed distribution analysis for improved significance testing of spatially heterogeneous parameter maps: Application to dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI biomarkers. Magn Reson Med. 2014;71 (3:1299–1311.
    1. Rosenkrantz AB. Histogram-based apparent diffusion coefficient analysis: an emerging tool for cervical cancer characterization. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:311–313.
    1. Shukla-Dave A, Lee NY, Jansen JF, Thaler HT, Stambuk HE, Fury MG, Patel SG, Moreira AL, Sherman E, Karimi S, Wang Y, Kraus D, Shah JP, Pfister DG, Koutcher JA. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging as a predictor of outcome in head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma patients with nodal metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82:1837–1844.
    1. Song YS, Choi SH, Park CK, Yi KS, Lee WJ, Yun TJ, Kim TM, Lee SH, Kim JH, Sohn CH, Park SH, Kim IH, Jahng GH, Chang KH. True progression versus pseudoprogression in the treatment of glioblastomas: a comparison study of normalized cerebral blood volume and apparent diffusion coefficient by histogram analysis. Korean J Radiol. 2013;14 (4:662–672.
    1. Tozer DJ, Jäger HR, Danchaivijitr N, Benton CE, Tofts PS, Rees JH, Waldman AD. Apparent diffusion coefficient histograms may predict low-grade glioma subtype. NMR Biomed. 2007;20:49–57.
    1. Woo S, Cho JY, Kim SY, Kim SH.2013Histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient map of diffusion-weighted MRI in endometrial cancer: a preliminary correlation study with histological grade Acta Radiole-pub ahead of print 6 December 2013; pii 0284185113514967.
    1. Yuh WT, Mayr NA, Jarjoura D, Wu D, Grecula JC, Lo SS, Edwards SM, Magnotta VA, Sammet S, Zhang H, Montebello JF, Fowler J, Knopp MV, Wang JZ. Predicting control of primary tumor and survival by DCE MRI during early therapy in cervical cancer. Invest Radiol. 2009;44:343–350.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnere