Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 6, 2025
Tracking the Mammary Architectural Features and Detecting Breast Cancer with Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Published on: December 15, 2014
A multicenter study of cervical cancer using quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging
Xue Wang1, Zhijun Ye2, Shujian Li3
1Department of Radiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children's Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, PR China.
Background:
Parameters from diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) have been increasingly used as imaging biomarkers for the diagnosis and monitoring of treatment responses in cancer. The consistency of DWI measurements across different centers remains uncertain, which limits the widespread use of quantitative DWI in clinical settings.
Purpose:
To investigate the consistency of quantitative metrics derived from DWI between different scanners in a multicenter clinical setting.
Material And Methods:
A total of 193 patients with cervical cancer from four scanners (MRI1, MRI2, MRI3, and MRI4) at three centers were included in this retrospective study. DWI data were processed using the mono-exponential and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) model, yielding the following parameters: apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC); true diffusion coefficient (D); pseudo-diffusion coefficient (D*); perfusion fraction (f); and the product of f and D* (fD*). Various parameters of cervical cancer obtained from different scanners were compared.
Results:
The parameters D and ADC derived from MRI1 and MRI2 were significantly different from those derived from MRI3 or MRI4 (P <0.01 for all comparisons). However, there was no significant difference in cervical cancer perfusion parameters (D* and fD*) between the different scanners (P >0.05). The P values of comparisons of all DWI parameters (D, D*, fD*, and ADC) between MRI3 and MRI4 (same vendor in different centers) for cervical cancer were all >0.05, except for f (P = 0.05).
Conclusion:
Scanners of the same model by the same vendor can yield close measurements of the ADC and IVIM parameters. The perfusion parameters showed higher consistency among the different scanners.
