Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 11, 2026
Tracking the Mammary Architectural Features and Detecting Breast Cancer with Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Published on: December 15, 2014
Value of diffusion kurtosis MR imaging and conventional diffusion weighed imaging for evaluating response to
Zehua Zhang1, Yuqin Zhang2, Feixiang Hu3
1Department of Radiology, Minhang Branch, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, No. 106, Ruili Road, 201100, Shanghai, China.
Objective:
To investigate the diagnostic value of diffusion kurtosis magnetic resonance imaging (DKI) and conventional diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for evaluating the response to first-line chemotherapy in unresectable pancreatic cancer.
Materials And Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed 21 patients with clinically and pathologically confirmed unresected pancreatic cancer who received palliative chemotherapy. Three-tesla MRI examinations containing DWI sequences with b values of 0, 100, 700, 1400, and 2100 s/mm2 were performed before and after chemotherapy. Parameters included the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), mean diffusion coefficient (MD), and mean diffusional kurtosis (MK). The performances of the DWI and DKI parameters in distinguishing the response to chemotherapy were evaluated by the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the date of first treatment to the date of death or the latest follow-up date.
Results:
The ADCchange and MDchange were significantly higher in the responding group (PR group) than in the nonresponding group (non-PR group) (ADCchange: 0.21 ± 0.05 vs. 0.11 ± 0.09, P = 0.02; MDchange: 0.37 ± 0.24 vs. 0.10 ± 0.12, P = 0.002). No statistical significance was shown when comparing ADCpre, ADCpost, MKpre, MKpost, MKchange, MDpre, and MDpost between the PR and non-PR groups. The ROC curve analysis indicated that MDchange (AUC = 0.898, cutoff value = 0.7143) performed better than ADCchange (AUC = 0.806, cutoff value = 0.1369) in predicting the response to chemotherapy.
Conclusion:
The ADCchange and MDchange demonstrated strong potential for evaluating the response to chemotherapy in unresectable pancreatic cancer. The MDchange showed higher specificity in the classification of PR and non-PR than the ADCchange. Other parameters, including ADCpre, ADCpost, MKpre, MKpost, MKchange, MDpre, and MDpost, are not suitable for response evaluation. The combined model SUMchange demonstrated superior performance compared to the individual DWI and DKI models. Further experiments are needed to evaluate the potential of DWI and DKI parameters in predicting the prognosis of patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.
More Related Videos
06:24Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging of an Orthotopic Pancreatic Cancer Mouse Model
Published on: April 18, 2015
10:25Author Spotlight: Integrating High-Resolution Intravital Imaging and MRI to Enhance Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Planning
Published on: April 12, 2024
