Monoexponential, biexponential, and stretched exponential diffusion-weighted imaging models: Quantitative biomarkers for differentiating renal clear cell carcinoma and minimal fat angiomyolipoma

Haojie Li; Lili Liang; Anqin Li; Yao Hu; Daoyu Hu; Zhen Li; Ihab R Kamel

doi:10.1002/jmri.25524

Monoexponential, biexponential, and stretched exponential diffusion-weighted imaging models: Quantitative biomarkers for differentiating renal clear cell carcinoma and minimal fat angiomyolipoma

J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017 Jul;46(1):240-247. doi: 10.1002/jmri.25524. Epub 2016 Nov 10.

Authors

Haojie Li¹, Lili Liang¹, Anqin Li¹, Yao Hu¹, Daoyu Hu¹, Zhen Li¹, Ihab R Kamel²

Affiliations

¹ Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
² Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

PMID: 27859853
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.25524

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the utility of various diffusion parameters obtained from monoexponential, biexponential, and stretched exponential diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) models in differentiating between minimal fat angiomyolipoma (MFAML) and clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).

Materials and methods: One hundred thirty-one patients with pathologically confirmed MFAML (n = 27) or ccRCC (n = 104) underwent multi-b value DWI (0∼1700 s/mm² ) imaging at 3.0 Tesla MRI. An isotropic apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) was calculated from diffusion-weighted images by using a monoexponential model. A pseudo-ADC (D_p ), true ADC (D_t ), and perfusion fraction (f_p ) were calculated from diffusion-weighted images by using a biexponential model. A water molecular diffusion heterogeneity index (α) and distributed diffusion coefficient (DDC) were calculated from diffusion-weighted images by using a stretched exponential model. All parameters were compared between MFAML and ccRCC by using the Student's t test. Receiver operating characteristic and intraclass correlation coefficient analysis were used for statistical evaluations.

Results: ADC, D_t , and α values were significantly lower in the MFAML group than in the ccRCC group (P < 0.001). D_p , f_p , and DDC values were slightly higher in the MFAML group than in the ccRCC group; however, the difference was not significant (P = 0.136, 0.090, and 0.424, respectively). The AUC values for both α (0.953) and D_t (0.964) were significantly higher than those for ADC (0860), D_p (0.605), f_p (0.596), and DDC (0.477) in the differentiation of MFAML from ccRCC (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Water molecular diffusion heterogeneity index (α) and D_t may provide additional information and could lead to improved differentiation with better sensitivity and specificity between MFAML and ccRCC compared with conventional diffusion parameters.

Level of evidence: 3 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;46:240-247.

Keywords: angiomyolipoma; clear cell renal cell carcinoma; diffusion-weighted imaging; exponential models.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Aged
Algorithms*
Angiomyolipoma / diagnostic imaging*
Angiomyolipoma / pathology
Artifacts
Biomarkers
Carcinoma, Renal Cell / diagnostic imaging*
Carcinoma, Renal Cell / pathology
Computer Simulation
Diagnosis, Differential
Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging / methods*
Female
Humans
Image Enhancement / methods
Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted / methods*
Kidney Neoplasms / diagnostic imaging*
Kidney Neoplasms / pathology
Male
Middle Aged
Models, Biological*
Models, Statistical
Motion
Reproducibility of Results
Sensitivity and Specificity

Substances

Biomarkers