Cargando…

Differentiating solitary brain metastases from high-grade gliomas with MR: comparing qualitative versus quantitative diagnostic strategies

PURPOSE: To investigate the diagnostic efficacy of MRI diagnostic algorithms with an ascending automatization, in distinguishing between high-grade glioma (HGG) and solitary brain metastases (SBM). METHODS: 36 patients with histologically proven HGG (n = 18) or SBM (n = 18), matched by size and loca...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Voicu, Ioan Paul, Pravatà, Emanuele, Panara, Valentina, Navarra, Riccardo, Mattei, Peter A., Caulo, Massimo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Milan 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9349158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35763250
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11547-022-01516-2
_version_ 1784762068992262144
author Voicu, Ioan Paul
Pravatà, Emanuele
Panara, Valentina
Navarra, Riccardo
Mattei, Peter A.
Caulo, Massimo
author_facet Voicu, Ioan Paul
Pravatà, Emanuele
Panara, Valentina
Navarra, Riccardo
Mattei, Peter A.
Caulo, Massimo
author_sort Voicu, Ioan Paul
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To investigate the diagnostic efficacy of MRI diagnostic algorithms with an ascending automatization, in distinguishing between high-grade glioma (HGG) and solitary brain metastases (SBM). METHODS: 36 patients with histologically proven HGG (n = 18) or SBM (n = 18), matched by size and location were enrolled from a database containing 655 patients. Four different diagnostic algorithms were performed serially to mimic the clinical setting where a radiologist would typically seek out further findings to reach a decision: pure qualitative, analytic qualitative (based on standardized evaluation of tumor features), semi-quantitative (based on perfusion and diffusion cutoffs included in the literature) and a quantitative data-driven algorithm of the perfusion and diffusion parameters. The diagnostic yields of the four algorithms were tested with ROC analysis and Kendall coefficient of concordance. RESULTS: Qualitative algorithm yielded sensitivity of 72.2%, specificity of 78.8%, and AUC of 0.75. Analytic qualitative algorithm distinguished HGG from SBM with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 77.7%, and an AUC of 0.889. The semi-quantitative algorithm yielded sensitivity of 94.4%, specificity of 83.3%, and AUC = 0.889. The data-driven algorithm yielded sensitivity = 94.4%, specificity = 100%, and AUC = 0.948. The concordance analysis between the four algorithms and the histologic findings showed moderate concordance for the first algorithm, (k = 0.501, P < 0.01), good concordance for the second (k = 0.798, P < 0.01), and third (k = 0.783, P < 0.01), and excellent concordance for fourth (k = 0.901, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: When differentiating HGG from SBM, an analytical qualitative algorithm outperformed qualitative algorithm, and obtained similar results compared to the semi-quantitative approach. However, the use of data-driven quantitative algorithm yielded an excellent differentiation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9349158
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Milan
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93491582022-08-05 Differentiating solitary brain metastases from high-grade gliomas with MR: comparing qualitative versus quantitative diagnostic strategies Voicu, Ioan Paul Pravatà, Emanuele Panara, Valentina Navarra, Riccardo Mattei, Peter A. Caulo, Massimo Radiol Med Diagnostic Imaging in Oncology PURPOSE: To investigate the diagnostic efficacy of MRI diagnostic algorithms with an ascending automatization, in distinguishing between high-grade glioma (HGG) and solitary brain metastases (SBM). METHODS: 36 patients with histologically proven HGG (n = 18) or SBM (n = 18), matched by size and location were enrolled from a database containing 655 patients. Four different diagnostic algorithms were performed serially to mimic the clinical setting where a radiologist would typically seek out further findings to reach a decision: pure qualitative, analytic qualitative (based on standardized evaluation of tumor features), semi-quantitative (based on perfusion and diffusion cutoffs included in the literature) and a quantitative data-driven algorithm of the perfusion and diffusion parameters. The diagnostic yields of the four algorithms were tested with ROC analysis and Kendall coefficient of concordance. RESULTS: Qualitative algorithm yielded sensitivity of 72.2%, specificity of 78.8%, and AUC of 0.75. Analytic qualitative algorithm distinguished HGG from SBM with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 77.7%, and an AUC of 0.889. The semi-quantitative algorithm yielded sensitivity of 94.4%, specificity of 83.3%, and AUC = 0.889. The data-driven algorithm yielded sensitivity = 94.4%, specificity = 100%, and AUC = 0.948. The concordance analysis between the four algorithms and the histologic findings showed moderate concordance for the first algorithm, (k = 0.501, P < 0.01), good concordance for the second (k = 0.798, P < 0.01), and third (k = 0.783, P < 0.01), and excellent concordance for fourth (k = 0.901, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: When differentiating HGG from SBM, an analytical qualitative algorithm outperformed qualitative algorithm, and obtained similar results compared to the semi-quantitative approach. However, the use of data-driven quantitative algorithm yielded an excellent differentiation. Springer Milan 2022-06-28 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9349158/ /pubmed/35763250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11547-022-01516-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Diagnostic Imaging in Oncology
Voicu, Ioan Paul
Pravatà, Emanuele
Panara, Valentina
Navarra, Riccardo
Mattei, Peter A.
Caulo, Massimo
Differentiating solitary brain metastases from high-grade gliomas with MR: comparing qualitative versus quantitative diagnostic strategies
title Differentiating solitary brain metastases from high-grade gliomas with MR: comparing qualitative versus quantitative diagnostic strategies
title_full Differentiating solitary brain metastases from high-grade gliomas with MR: comparing qualitative versus quantitative diagnostic strategies
title_fullStr Differentiating solitary brain metastases from high-grade gliomas with MR: comparing qualitative versus quantitative diagnostic strategies
title_full_unstemmed Differentiating solitary brain metastases from high-grade gliomas with MR: comparing qualitative versus quantitative diagnostic strategies
title_short Differentiating solitary brain metastases from high-grade gliomas with MR: comparing qualitative versus quantitative diagnostic strategies
title_sort differentiating solitary brain metastases from high-grade gliomas with mr: comparing qualitative versus quantitative diagnostic strategies
topic Diagnostic Imaging in Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9349158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35763250
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11547-022-01516-2
work_keys_str_mv AT voicuioanpaul differentiatingsolitarybrainmetastasesfromhighgradegliomaswithmrcomparingqualitativeversusquantitativediagnosticstrategies
AT pravataemanuele differentiatingsolitarybrainmetastasesfromhighgradegliomaswithmrcomparingqualitativeversusquantitativediagnosticstrategies
AT panaravalentina differentiatingsolitarybrainmetastasesfromhighgradegliomaswithmrcomparingqualitativeversusquantitativediagnosticstrategies
AT navarrariccardo differentiatingsolitarybrainmetastasesfromhighgradegliomaswithmrcomparingqualitativeversusquantitativediagnosticstrategies
AT matteipetera differentiatingsolitarybrainmetastasesfromhighgradegliomaswithmrcomparingqualitativeversusquantitativediagnosticstrategies
AT caulomassimo differentiatingsolitarybrainmetastasesfromhighgradegliomaswithmrcomparingqualitativeversusquantitativediagnosticstrategies