Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

AJNR Awards, New Junior Editors, and more. Read the latest AJNR updates

Research ArticleHead & Neck

Retinoblastoma: Value of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging and Correlation with Tumor Angiogenesis

F. Rodjan, P. de Graaf, P. van der Valk, A.C. Moll, J.P.A. Kuijer, D.L. Knol, J.A. Castelijns and P.J.W. Pouwels
American Journal of Neuroradiology December 2012, 33 (11) 2129-2135; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A3119
F. Rodjan
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (F.R., P.d.G., J.A.C.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
P. de Graaf
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (F.R., P.d.G., J.A.C.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
P. van der Valk
bPathology (P.v.d.V.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
A.C. Moll
cOphthalmology (A.C.M.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.P.A. Kuijer
dPhysics and Medical Technology (J.P.A.K., P.J.W.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D.L. Knol
eEpidemiology and Biostatistics (D.L.K.), VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.A. Castelijns
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (F.R., P.d.G., J.A.C.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
P.J.W. Pouwels
dPhysics and Medical Technology (J.P.A.K., P.J.W.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Noninvasive evaluation of retinoblastoma treatment response has become more important due to increased use of eye-sparing treatments. We evaluated the relation between DCE-MR imaging and histopathologic parameters to determine the value of DCE-MR imaging in assessing tumor angiogenesis and prognostic features.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen consecutive patients with retinoblastoma (mean age, 24 months; range, 2–70 months) undergoing enucleation as the primary treatment (15 eyes) were scanned at 1.5T by using dedicated surface coils. Pretreatment DCE-MR imaging of the most affected eye was evaluated by 2 observers by using curve-pattern analysis, with the first 5 minutes of each curve and the full time-series described as κ5min and κ17min, respectively. Assessed histopathologic and immunologic parameters included optic nerve invasion, choroid invasion, MVD, tumor necrosis, and expression of VEGF and Flt-1.

RESULTS: The median value of κ5min was 1.28 (range, 0.87–2.07) and correlated positively with MVD (P = .008). The median value of κ17min was 1.33 (range, 0.35–3.08) and correlated negatively with tumor necrosis (P = .002). Other histopathologic and immunohistopathologic parameters did not correlate with DCE-MR imaging parameters. Interobserver agreement was 0.53 for κ5min and 0.91 for κ17min.

CONCLUSIONS: In retinoblastoma, the early phase of the DCE time curve positively correlates with MVD, while the presence of late enhancement is correlated with necrosis. Thus, the potential for DCE-MR imaging to noninvasively assess tumor angiogenesis and necrosis in retinoblastoma is promising and warrants further investigation.

ABBREVIATIONS:

DCE
dynamic contrast-enhanced
Flt-1
VEGF receptor-1
κ5min
curve-pattern analysis of the first DCE time-series
κ17min
curve-pattern analysis for the full dataset
kep
rate-constant
Ktrans
transfer constant
MVD
microvessel density
ve
extravascular extracellular space per unit volume of tissue
VEGF
vascular endothelial growth factor

In retinoblastoma, increasing eye preservation without sacrifice of tumor control has been achieved by the introduction of conservative treatment strategies. In particular, the recent introduction of selective intra-arterial chemotherapy infusion via the ophthalmic artery as an effective treatment for intraocular retinoblastoma will dramatically decrease the number of enucleations.1⇓–3 In the future, more and more patients will be treated without histopathologic assessment of their tumor, leading to uncertainty about certain risk factors that can predict disease dissemination and prognosis because histopathology is still the criterion standard for detection of tumor spread and therefore prognosis of retinoblastoma.4 Currently, the risk assessment for disseminated disease and the decision about the use of prophylactic therapy are based on the following characteristics: 1) tumor invasion in the optic nerve posterior to the lamina cribrosa, 2) invasion in the anterior eye segment, and 3) extensive invasion of the ocular coats (massive choroidal or scleral invasion). These characteristics can be well-detected on histopathology, but detection by conventional MR imaging is not optimal so far.5⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–13 Therefore, it is important to assess the prospects of other MR imaging methods that could further optimize the tumor tissue characterization in vivo.

Tumor angiogenesis is a key element in the pathophysiology of tumor growth and metastasis. It has been shown that tumor MVD as a marker for angiogenesis correlates with both local invasive growth and the presence of metastases in retinoblastoma.4,14 Thus, tumor angiogenesis in retinoblastoma is considered to be a risk factor for disseminated disease. Currently, tumor angiogenesis can only be assessed in vitro on histopathologic specimens by assessment of MVD and angiogenic growth factors such as VEGF and Flt-1. In addition to promoting angiogenesis, these growth factors cause an increased vascular permeability in neovascular capillary beds.

A noninvasive evaluation of tumor angiogenesis might be obtained with DCE-MR imaging, and a noninvasive imaging biomarker for tumor angiogenesis in vivo could have potential value in assessing patients treated with eye-preservation strategies. To our knowledge, the correlation between DCE-MR imaging and retinoblastoma microvasculature has not been described. Hence, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the relation between DCE-MR imaging and histopathologic parameters to determine the value of DCE-MR imaging in assessing tumor angiogenesis and providing a new radiologic prognostic indicator in retinoblastoma.

Materials and Methods

Patient Population

From May 2006 to September 2009, patients with retinoblastoma, diagnosed with extensive funduscopy and sonography under general anesthesia, were included in this prospective study if they met the following criteria: 1) pretreatment DCE-MR imaging, 2) enucleation due to retinoblastoma as primary treatment, and 3) availability of diagnostic-quality pathologic material. Twenty-one patients with retinoblastoma had DCE-MR imaging before enucleation. Five patients were excluded because of insufficient histopathologic material (3 patients) or inadequate DCE-MR images (2 patients), and 1 patient was treated with chemotherapy before enucleation. The final study population consisted of 15 patients (5 girls and 10 boys) with a mean age of 24 months (median, 23 months; range, 2–70 months). Five patients had bilateral disease, for which only the most affected eye was enucleated. Clinical records were reviewed by 1 reviewer (F.R.) to assess age at diagnosis, days between MR imaging and enucleation, laterality, presence of vitreous/subretinal tumor seeding (yes/no), extraocular tumor recurrence, and the time interval between retinoblastoma diagnosis and the last known follow-up date. This study was approved by the local medical ethics review committee, with a waiver of informed consent.

MR Imaging

All MR imaging examinations were performed with the patient under general anesthesia on a 1.5T scanner (Sonata; Siemens, Erlangen, Germany) by using a dedicated surface coil focused on the most affected eye. MR imaging included transverse and sagittal spin-echo T1-weighted images (TR/TE, 420/13 ms; 3 and 2 acquisitions, respectively) and transverse spin-echo T2-weighted images (TR/TE, 2470/120 ms; 1 acquisition). All conventional images had an in-plane resolution of 0.58 × 0.58 mm2 and a section thickness of 2 mm. Transverse DCE-MR images were obtained with 3D fast low-angle shot (TR/TE, 8.6/4.8 ms; flip angle, 25°; in-plane resolution, 0.66 × 0.66 mm2). One 3D volume consisted of 16 partitions of 3-mm thickness (acquisition time per volume, 17 seconds), and a total of 20 consecutive volumes were acquired in 5 minutes 39 seconds. During DCE-MR imaging, an intravenous bolus injection of 0.2-mmol/L gadopentetate dimeglumine (Magnevist; Schering, Berlin, Germany) per kg of body weight was administered after the first volume. To determine late enhancement, we acquired 2 short DCE series consisting of 3 volumes at t = 13 minutes and t = 17 minutes after contrast injection. After each DCE-MR imaging series, fat-suppressed T1-weighted spin-echo images were obtained (TR/TE, 653/11 ms; 3 acquisitions) in transverse, sagittal, and coronal orientations. Thus, the 3 DCE series lasted <8 minutes in total and were acquired interleaved with the conventional sequences.

Image Analysis

Conventional MR Imaging.

Tumor volume measurements were performed by 2 observers in consensus (F.R. and P.d.G.) on postcontrast transverse T1-weighted MR images with use of a computerized image-analysis tool (Centricity Radiology RA 600; GE Healthcare, Milwaukee, Wisconsin). On every section in which tumor was present, tumor was manually outlined as a region of interest, and the region of interest covered the whole tumor on each section. Surfaces of the ROIs were calculated, and tumor volume was obtained from the surfaces on consecutive sections multiplied by the section thickness and intersection gap. In addition, tumor enhancement was scored as either homogeneous or heterogeneous.

Region-of-Interest Placement for Dynamic Analysis.

DCE-MR imaging data were analyzed by using the time-series of a region of interest, which was placed by 2 observers independently (F.R. and P.d.G.). Both observers were blinded to histologic findings. On a workstation (Leonardo; Siemens), ROIs were manually drawn on a volume at the end of the first DCE series. The region of interest was positioned on 1 section within the most enhancing part of the tumor assessed visually. Care was taken to avoid areas with necrosis within the tumor on the basis of focal high signal intensity on T2-weighted images and the absence of enhancement on postcontrast images. Because some ROIs were small, it was verified that the position of the ROIs remained strictly within the tissue during the dynamic series and was not influenced by minor motion (despite anesthesia). For each region of interest, signal intensity as a function of time was extracted.

Dynamic Analysis.

Preferably, quantitative analysis of DCE-MR imaging is performed to obtain values of the volume Ktrans and the volume of ve.15 This, however, requires determination of both an arterial input function and precontrast T1 relaxation times, which were not included in the current protocol. Recently, Guo and Reddick16 proposed a curve-pattern analysis based only on the dynamic measurements, yielding a κ-value, which showed a close correlation with the rate constant kep, which is defined as kep = Ktrans/ve.

This curve-pattern analysis was performed by using Matlab (MathWorks, Natick, Massachusetts) (P.J.W.P. and J.P.A.K.) both for the first DCE time-series (resulting in a κ-value for 5 minutes) and for the full dataset (κ-value for 17 minutes). The κ17min can, therefore, be considered as a parameter for late enhancement. The analysis was performed on smoothed curves through the actual time points. The smoothed signal intensity of the first series (t = 0–5 minutes 39 seconds) was estimated by an exponential fit of the form S(t) = S(0)exp(−k(t − Δt), in which Δt incorporates the time delay of contrast injection. For each of the second and third series (at t = 13 minutes and t = 17 minutes), the signal intensity of the 3 volumes within these series was simply averaged.

Histopathologic Analyses and Immunohistochemical Staining

All included eyes were re-evaluated by 1 pathologist (P.v.d.V.) with 11 years of experience in ophthalmopathology, who was blinded to the patient clinical records and MR imaging findings. Histopathologic evaluation, by using hematoxilin-eosin staining, included the following: tumor necrosis (semiquantitatively estimated according to the percentage of necrotic tumor area), involvement of choroid (inflammation; minimal or massive tumor invasion), optic nerve invasion (prelaminar, laminar, or postlaminar), and tumor differentiation (poor-, moderate- and well-differentiated).

From all affected eyes, deparaffinized 4-μm sections were immunohistochemically stained by using the avidin-biotin-peroxidase complex and direct antibodies against CD-31 (DAKO, Glostrup, Denmark), VEGF (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, California), and Flt-1 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology). In representative parts of the tumor, in 5 high-power fields (magnification, ×20), the mean MVD of the tumor was calculated on CD-31-stained specimens. Evaluation of VEGF and Flt-1 staining intensity in the tumor was graded as follows: negative, weak, or strong. These methods have been described previously by De Graaf et al.9

Statistical Analysis

Interobserver variability for κ5min and κ17min was analyzed by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient. Subsequent analyses were performed by using the average of the 2 observers. All statistical calculations were performed by using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, Version 15.0 (SPSS, Chicago, Illinois). Spearman rank correlations were calculated to test the strength of the association between DCE-MR imaging parameters and histopathologic parameters. Only 2-tailed tests were used. A P value <.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Clinical Findings

MR imaging was performed at a mean of 6 days (median, 6 days; range, 1–13 days) before enucleation. In 6 of 15 eyes, vitreous and/or subretinal seedings were observed. Mean follow-up time after enucleation was 35 months (range, 10–54 months). No patients developed histologic-proved extraocular recurrences, and all patients were still alive at the time of follow-up.

Conventional and DCE-MR Imaging Parameters

The results of all patients are summarized in the Table. Mean tumor volume was 2513 mm3 (range, 288–4847 mm3). All 15 tumors showed heterogeneous enhancement, as shown in Figs 1–3.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table.

Dynamic MR imaging and histologic findings in patients with retinoblastoma

Fig 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 1.

Retinoblastoma tumor in the right eye (patient 9) with transverse T2-weighted spin-echo (A) and transverse contrast-enhanced T1-weighted spin-echo (B) MR images. Curve-pattern analyses of the signal intensity curve of 1 observer (C) shows slow initial uptake of contrast (κ5min = 0.76) and slow further rising of the curve (κ17min = 1.06). Immunohistochemical staining with CD-31 (original magnification ×10) (D) shows brown-stained microvessels on a background of blue tumor cells with a MVD of 11. Hematoxilin-eosin staining (E) illustrates 30% necrotic areas (arrow).

DCE-MR imaging parameters determined in all 15 patients by both observers resulted in an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.53 for κ5min and 0.91 for κ17min. A comparison between the 2 observers showed that 1 patient (patient 15) with a large and heterogeneous tumor was the main cause of disagreement. When we disregarded this patient and considered 14 of 15 patients, the intraclass correlation coefficient for κ5min increased to 0.92, while the intraclass correlation coefficient for κ17min did not change.

A large range was observed both for κ5min (mean, 1.28 minutes; median, 1.12 minutes; range, 0.87–2.07 minutes) and κ17min (mean, 1.33 minutes; median, 1.06 minutes; range, 0.35–3.08). Examples of the DCE curves of 3 patients as measured by 1 observer are shown in Figs 1–3. Figure 1C (patient 9) shows a slow initial uptake of contrast agent, resulting in a low value for κ5min of 0.76. Seventeen minutes after contrast injection, the signal intensity of the tumor continued to increase slowly, resulting in an intermediate value for κ17min of 1.06. Figure 2C (patient 2) shows another dynamic behavior: a fast uptake of contrast agent with maximum signal intensity already reached 3 minutes after contrast injection, resulting in κ5min = 1.67. At later time points, the signal intensity remained similar, resulting in κ17min = 2.79. Generally, a steep slope and an early arrival at equilibrium lead to a higher κ-value, causing the high value of κ17min in this case. Instead, if the curve continues to increase during the second and third time-series, then κ5min and κ17min have more similar (and lower) values, as illustrated for patient 5 in Fig 3. In our study, none of the tumor ROIs had a clear decrease of signal intensity observed in the assessed timeframe of 17 minutes.

Fig 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 2.

Retinoblastoma tumor in the right eye (patient 2) with transverse T2-weighted spin-echo (A) and transverse contrast-enhanced T1-weighted spin-echo (B) MR images. Curve-pattern analysis of the signal intensity curve of 1 observer (C) shows fast uptake of contrast agent (κ5min = 1.67) and early arrival at equilibrium (κ17min = 2.79). Immunohistochemical staining with CD-31 (original magnification ×10) (D) shows a high MVD of 21, and hematoxilin-eosin staining shows only 10% necrosis (arrow) (E).

Fig 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 3.

Retinoblastoma tumor in the right eye (patient 5) with transverse T2-weighted spin-echo (A) and transverse contrast-enhanced T1-weighted fat-suppressed spin-echo (B) MR images. Curve-pattern analysis of the signal intensity curve of 1 observer (C) shows a moderate uptake of contrast agent (κ5min = 1.22) and a continuing increase leading to κ17min = 0.84. Immunohistochemical staining with CD-31 (original magnification ×10) (D) shows an MVD of 14. Hematoxilin eosin staining (E) shows a large area of necrosis (70%) (arrow I) in vital tumor tissue (arrow II).

Histopathologic and Immunohistochemical Findings

The mean amount of tumor necrosis was 29% (median, 20%; range, 0%–90%). Minimal tumor infiltration of the choroid occurred in 1, and inflammation, in 2 of the 15 eyes. Massive invasion in the choroid is a risk factor for disseminated disease and did not occur in our patients. Postlaminar optic nerve invasion is an important risk factor for extraocular recurrence and occurred in 3 eyes. Prelaminar optic nerve infiltration occurred in 6 of 15 eyes. In 6 eyes, no optic nerve infiltration was scored. In 1 patient, the optic nerve was cut at surgery at the scleral surface without a stump. The tumor, however, reached the cut surface and was considered as positive for postlaminar optic nerve invasion. Ten of 15 tumors were poorly differentiated; 4, moderately differentiated; and 1 well-differentiated.

The mean value of MVD was 18.4 per ×20 field (range, 10–37), as shown in Figs 1–3. VEGF immunoreactivity was positive in 7, weak in 6, and negative in 2 patients. Flt-1 staining was determined as positive in 1 patient, weak in 5, and negative in 9 patients.

Correlation between DCE-MR Parameters and Histopathology/Immunohistochemistry

A positive correlation in retinoblastoma was found between κ5min and mean MVD (P = .008) (Fig 4 A), and a negative association, between κ17min and the percentage of necrosis (P = .002) (Fig 4B). No statistically significant correlation between κ5min or κ17min was found with other clinical or histopathologic data (choroid invasion, respectively, P = .66 and P = .17; optic nerve invasion, respectively, P = .27 and P = .90; VEGF, respectively, P = .91 and P = .59; and Flt-1, respectively, P = .14 and P = .13). After we disregarded patient 15 because of interobserver disagreement, results remained similar. In fact, we found an additional positive correlation between κ17min and MVD (P = .03).

Fig 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 4.

Graphs show the positive correlation (A) between κ5min and mean MVD (P = .008) and the negative correlation (B) between κ17min (a measure for late enhancement) and tumor necrosis (P = .002).

Discussion

Our study showed that DCE-MR imaging parameters correlate significantly with MVD and tumor necrosis. We observed a statistically significant correlation between mean MVD and κ5min. MVD is an important parameter to assess tumor angiogenesis in vitro, which has been associated with local invasive growth and hematogenous metastases in retinoblastoma.14 Highly vascularized tissue typically shows rapid enhancement after contrast injection. Indeed, tumors with a high MVD were described by a DCE-MR imaging curve with a steep slope and therefore a high value for κ5min. The parameter κ obtained with curve-pattern analysis has a strong correlation with kep.16 Because kep has been shown to be sensitive to treatment in previous literature,17,18 this finding suggests a similar role for κ.

In addition, we observed a negative correlation between the amount of tumor necrosis and κ17min, a parameter that represents the shape of the curve for a long timeframe of 17 minutes. The occurrence of late enhancement is represented by a DCE-MR imaging curve that gradually but steadily increases, resulting in a low value for κ17min. In the literature, similar curves with late enhancement are associated with tumor necrosis.19,20 With curve-pattern analysis, we can semiquantitatively determine the occurrence of late enhancement, but we cannot differentiate among physiologic factors such as vascularization, transfer rates, volume of the interstitial space, or a combination of these factors. Although clearly necrotic areas were not included in the ROIs, DCE-MR imaging was sensitive enough to be negatively associated with the degree of necrosis, as also observed in some preclinical tumor models.21 In necrotic tumors, the central portions of the tumor become relatively hypovascular and eventually necrotic as the tumor grows.22 This regional hypoxia induces damage to vessels in the border-zones adjacent to central necrosis.23 We assume that at a later stage, contrast may leak from the damaged vessels into the more vital parts of the tumor, causing late enhancement.

Severe hypoxia, present in necrotic tumors, contributes to resistance to radiation therapy and decreases the efficacy of cytotoxic drugs including carboplatin and melphalan.24,25 These are both important chemotherapeutic agents in retinoblastoma treatment for chemoreduction and selective intra-arterial chemotherapy, respectively. Thus, evaluation of κ17min as a noninvasive marker for tumor necrosis could become a useful parameter in the choice of treatment or to monitor treatment response.26,27 Other treatment strategies, such as vascular targeting with antiangiogenic (anti-VEGF drugs) and angiostatic agents, are emerging as possible treatment options for retinoblastoma.28⇓⇓–31 VEGF is correlated with tumor MVD in different tumors.32⇓–34 Although we observed a correlation between κ5min and MVD, we did not find an association between DCE-MR imaging parameters and VEGF, possibly due to our small sample size.

Although not directly related to physiologic parameters, curve-pattern analysis could prove a stable measure for DCE-MR imaging analysis. The method has only recently been suggested and has not yet been generally used. Application in retinoblastoma and the correlation with MVD and necrosis suggest the applicability of this curve-pattern analysis method, which does not require arterial input function or baseline T1 relaxation time measurements.

Some limitations of our study should be addressed. The spatial alignment of MR imaging and histopathology is not perfect. Because of the paucity of clear landmarks, it is difficult to get the same cross-section between MR imaging and histopathologic specimens. However, tumor angiogenesis influences all vital tumor tissue and not only the part in which the region of interest was placed, as can be concluded from the convincing correlation between κ5min and mean MVD. In our study, the intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.53 for κ5min indicated only modest agreement. This low intraclass correlation coefficient was due to only 1 patient with a large and heterogeneous tumor, while for the other 14 patients, the interobserver agreement of both κ-values was excellent. Especially in large heterogeneous tumors, a localized comparison between histopathology and DCE-MR imaging will be useful. For instance, it may be expected that a voxelwise evaluation of DCE-MR imaging data of the whole tumor will separately identify highly vascularized regions and regions near necrotic areas on the basis of high κ5min and low κ17min, respectively. In this respect, a higher field strength of 3T, possibly in combination with a multichannel head coil, would be advantageous for voxelwise evaluations because of the higher signal-to-noise ratio.

Another study limitation is the 17-minute timeframe of DCE-MR imaging after contrast injection. In this timeframe, we did not observe a decrease of signal intensity, which would be interpreted as washout of contrast agent. Although in other tumor types, this curve pattern is common and characteristic for a malignant tumor,35,36 it was not observed in these 15 cases of retinoblastoma. Finally, because of the small size of our patient cohort, our findings have to be considered preliminary; therefore, the discriminatory value of DCE-MR imaging in predicting aggressive behavior of a particular tumor is not possible yet. Our results need validation in a much larger group of patients, preferentially in a multicentric study.

Conclusions

In retinoblastoma, the early phase of the DCE time curve positively correlates with MVD, while the presence of late enhancement is correlated with necrosis. Thus, the potential for DCE-MR imaging to noninvasively assess angiogenesis and necrosis in retinoblastoma tumors is promising and warrants further investigation.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures: Jonas Castelijns—RELATED: Grant: ODAS Foundation, Comments: I am the project leader and received the grant to pay the researchers.

  • F.R. is financially supported by grants from the ODAS Foundation, Delft, the Netherlands; the National Foundation for the Blind and Visually Impaired, Utrecht, the Netherlands; and the Blindenhulp Foundation, Gravenhage, the Netherlands.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Abramson DH,
    2. Dunkel IJ,
    3. Brodie SE,
    4. et al
    . Superselective ophthalmic artery chemotherapy as primary treatment for retinoblastoma (chemosurgery). Ophthalmology 2010; 117: 1623– 29
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Gobin YP,
    2. Dunkel IJ,
    3. Marr BP,
    4. et al
    . Intra-arterial chemotherapy for the management of retinoblastoma: four-year experience. Arch Ophthalmol 2011; 129: 732– 37
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Suzuki S,
    2. Yamane T,
    3. Mohri M,
    4. et al
    . Selective ophthalmic arterial injection therapy for intraocular retinoblastoma: the long-term prognosis. Ophthalmology 2011; 118: 2081– 87
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Marback EF,
    2. Arias VE,
    3. Paranhos A Jr.,
    4. et al
    . Tumour angiogenesis as a prognostic factor for disease dissemination in retinoblastoma. Br J Ophthalmol 2003; 87: 1224– 28
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Uusitalo MS,
    2. Van Quill KR,
    3. Scott IU,
    4. et al
    . Evaluation of chemoprophylaxis in patients with unilateral retinoblastoma with high-risk features on histopathologic examination. Arch Ophthalmol 2001; 119: 41– 48
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Schueler AO,
    2. Hosten N,
    3. Bechrakis NE,
    4. et al
    . High resolution magnetic resonance imaging of retinoblastoma. Br J Ophthalmol 2003; 87: 330– 35
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Lemke AJ,
    2. Kazi I,
    3. Mergner U,
    4. et al
    . Retinoblastoma: MR appearance using a surface coil in comparison with histopathological results. Eur Radiol 2007; 17: 49– 60
    CrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Honavar SG,
    2. Singh AD,
    3. Shields CL,
    4. et al
    . Postenucleation adjuvant therapy in high-risk retinoblastoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2002; 120: 923– 31
    PubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. de Graaf P,
    2. van der Valk P,
    3. Moll AC,
    4. et al
    . Contrast-enhancement of the anterior eye segment in patients with retinoblastoma: correlation between clinical, MR imaging, and histopathologic findings. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010; 31: 237– 45
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. de Graaf P,
    2. Goricke S,
    3. Rodjan F,
    4. et al
    . Guidelines for imaging retinoblastoma: imaging principles and MRI standardization. Pediatr Radiol 2011; 42: 2– 14
    PubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Chantada GL,
    2. Dunkel IJ,
    3. Antoneli CB,
    4. et al
    . Risk factors for extraocular relapse following enucleation after failure of chemoreduction in retinoblastoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2007; 49: 256– 60
    CrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Chantada GL,
    2. Casco F,
    3. Fandino AC,
    4. et al
    . Outcome of patients with retinoblastoma and postlaminar optic nerve invasion. Ophthalmology 2007; 114: 2083– 89
    CrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Brisse HJ,
    2. Guesmi M,
    3. Aerts I,
    4. et al
    . Relevance of CT and MRI in retinoblastoma for the diagnosis of postlaminar invasion with normal-size optic nerve: a retrospective study of 150 patients with histological comparison. Pediatr Radiol 2007; 37: 649– 56
    CrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Rossler J,
    2. Dietrich T,
    3. Pavlakovic H,
    4. et al
    . Higher vessel densities in retinoblastoma with local invasive growth and metastasis. Am J Pathol 2004; 164: 391– 94
    PubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Tofts PS,
    2. Brix G,
    3. Buckley DL,
    4. et al
    . Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10: 223– 32
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Guo JY,
    2. Reddick WE
    . DCE-MRI pixel-by-pixel quantitative curve pattern analysis and its application to osteosarcoma. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009; 30: 177– 84
    CrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Cho JH,
    2. Cho G,
    3. Song Y,
    4. et al
    . Feasibility of FAIR imaging for evaluating tumor perfusion. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010; 32: 738– 44
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Padhani AR,
    2. Husband JE
    . Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI studies in oncology with an emphasis on quantification, validation and human studies. Clin Radiol 2001; 56: 607– 20
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Cho H,
    2. Ackerstaff E,
    3. Carlin S,
    4. et al
    . Noninvasive multimodality imaging of the tumor microenvironment: registered dynamic magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography studies of a preclinical tumor model of tumor hypoxia. Neoplasia 2009; 11: 247– 59, 2p
    PubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Dadiani M,
    2. Margalit R,
    3. Sela N,
    4. et al
    . High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of disparities in the transcapillary transfer rates in orthotopically inoculated invasive breast tumors. Cancer Res 2004; 64: 3155– 61
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    1. Egeland TA,
    2. Gaustad JV,
    3. Galappathi K,
    4. et al
    . Magnetic resonance imaging of tumor necrosis. Acta Oncol 2011; 50: 427– 34
    CrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Miles KA
    . Tumour angiogenesis and its relation to contrast enhancement on computed tomography: a review. Eur J Radiol 1999; 30: 198– 205
    CrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Saeed M,
    2. Lund G,
    3. Wendland MF,
    4. et al
    . Magnetic resonance characterization of the peri-infarction zone of reperfused myocardial infarction with necrosis-specific and extracellular nonspecific contrast media. Circulation 2001; 103: 871– 76
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Beasley NJ,
    2. Wykoff CC,
    3. Watson PH,
    4. et al
    . Carbonic anhydrase IX, an endogenous hypoxia marker, expression in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and its relationship to hypoxia, necrosis, and microvessel density. Cancer Res 2001; 61: 5262– 67
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. Vaupel P,
    2. Harrison L
    . Tumor hypoxia: causative factors, compensatory mechanisms, and cellular response. Oncologist 2004; 9 (suppl 5): 4– 9
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    1. Jockovich ME,
    2. Suarez F,
    3. Alegret A,
    4. et al
    . Mechanism of retinoblastoma tumor cell death after focal chemotherapy, radiation, and vascular targeting therapy in a mouse model. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2007; 48: 5371– 76
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. Mineo TC,
    2. Mineo D,
    3. Onorati I,
    4. et al
    . New predictors of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and survival for invasive thymoma: a retrospective analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2010; 17: 3022– 29
    CrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Jockovich ME,
    2. Bajenaru ML,
    3. Pina Y,
    4. et al
    . Retinoblastoma tumor vessel maturation impacts efficacy of vessel targeting in the LH(BETA)T(AG) mouse model. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2007; 48: 2476– 82
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Knopp MV,
    2. Weiss E,
    3. Sinn HP,
    4. et al
    . Pathophysiologic basis of contrast enhancement in breast tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10: 260– 66
    CrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. George ML,
    2. Dzik-Jurasz AS,
    3. Padhani AR,
    4. et al
    . Non-invasive methods of assessing angiogenesis and their value in predicting response to treatment in colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 2001; 88: 1628– 36
    CrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Lee SY,
    2. Kim DK,
    3. Cho JH,
    4. et al
    . Inhibitory effect of bevacizumab on the angiogenesis and growth of retinoblastoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2008; 126: 953– 58
    CrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Mattern J,
    2. Koomagi R,
    3. Volm M
    . Association of vascular endothelial growth factor expression with intratumoral microvessel density and tumour cell proliferation in human epidermoid lung carcinoma. Br J Cancer 1996; 73: 931– 34
    CrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    1. Stitt AW,
    2. Simpson DA,
    3. Boocock C,
    4. et al
    . Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and its receptors is regulated in eyes with intra-ocular tumours. J Pathol 1998; 186: 306– 12
    CrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Viglietto G,
    2. Romano A,
    3. Maglione D,
    4. et al
    . Neovascularization in human germ cell tumors correlates with a marked increase in the expression of the vascular endothelial growth factor but not the placenta-derived growth factor. Oncogene 1996; 13: 577– 87
    PubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Buadu LD,
    2. Murakami J,
    3. Murayama S,
    4. et al
    . Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 1996; 200: 639– 49
    PubMed
  36. 36.↵
    1. Pennasilico GM,
    2. Arcuri PP,
    3. Laschena F,
    4. et al
    . Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of melanoma: in vivo preliminary studies with dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction. Melanoma Res 2002; 12: 365– 71
    CrossRefPubMed
  • Received November 8, 2011.
  • Accepted after revision January 29, 2012.
  • © 2012 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 33 (11)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 33, Issue 11
1 Dec 2012
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Retinoblastoma: Value of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging and Correlation with Tumor Angiogenesis
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
F. Rodjan, P. de Graaf, P. van der Valk, A.C. Moll, J.P.A. Kuijer, D.L. Knol, J.A. Castelijns, P.J.W. Pouwels
Retinoblastoma: Value of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging and Correlation with Tumor Angiogenesis
American Journal of Neuroradiology Dec 2012, 33 (11) 2129-2135; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3119

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Retinoblastoma: Value of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging and Correlation with Tumor Angiogenesis
F. Rodjan, P. de Graaf, P. van der Valk, A.C. Moll, J.P.A. Kuijer, D.L. Knol, J.A. Castelijns, P.J.W. Pouwels
American Journal of Neuroradiology Dec 2012, 33 (11) 2129-2135; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3119
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Correlation Between Ktrans and Microvessel Density in Different Tumors: A Meta-analysis
  • Crossref (13)
  • Google Scholar

This article has been cited by the following articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

  • The potential of 3T high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis, staging, and follow-up of retinoblastoma
    Marcus C. de Jong, Pim de Graaf, Hervé J. Brisse, Paolo Galluzzi, Sophia L. Göricke, Annette C. Moll, Francis L. Munier, Maja Beck Popovic, Alexandre P. Moulin, Stefano Binaghi, Jonas A. Castelijns, Philippe Maeder, Jonas A. Castelijns, Pim de Graaf, Marcus C. de Jong, Hervé J. Brisse, Paolo Galluzzi, Sophia L. Göricke, Philippe Maeder
    Survey of Ophthalmology 2015 60 4
  • Characterization of cervical lymph nodes using DCE-MRI: Differentiation between metastases from SCC of head and neck and benign lymph nodes
    Shuo Yan, Zhiye Wang, Li Li, Yu Guo, Xiaodong Ji, Hongyan Ni, Wen Shen, Shuang Xia
    Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation 2016 64 2
  • Magnetic resonance imaging based functional imaging in paediatric oncology
    Karen A. Manias, Simrandip K. Gill, Lesley MacPherson, Katharine Foster, Adam Oates, Andrew C. Peet
    European Journal of Cancer 2017 72
  • Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Ocular Melanoma as a Tool to Predict Metastatic Potential
    Wenbo Wei, Guang Jia, Hendrik von Tengg-Kobligk, Johannes T. Heverhagen, Mohamed Abdel-Rahman, Lai Wei, John B. Christoforidis, Frederick Davidorf, Michael V. Knopp
    Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 2017 41 5
  • Benign or Malignant Characterization of Soft-Tissue Tumors by Using Semiquantitative and Quantitative Parameters of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    Yu Zhang, Bin Yue, Xiaodan Zhao, Haisong Chen, Lingling Sun, Xuexi Zhang, Dapeng Hao
    Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal 2020 71 1
  • Eye-specific quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI analysis for patients with intraocular masses
    Myriam G. Jaarsma-Coes, Teresa A. Ferreira, Petra J. van Houdt, Uulke A. van der Heide, Gregorius P. M. Luyten, Jan-Willem M. Beenakker
    Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine 2022 35 2
  • Correlation of radiomic features on dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance with microvessel density in hepatocellular carcinoma based on different models
    Hongwei Liang, Chunhong Hu, Jian Lu, Tao Zhang, Jifeng Jiang, Ding Ding, Sheng Du, Shaofeng Duan
    Journal of International Medical Research 2021 49 3
  • Quantitative parameters correlated well with differentiation of squamous cell carcinoma at head and neck: a study of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI
    Xiao Dong Ji, Shuo Yan, Shuang Xia, Yu Guo, Wen Shen
    Acta Radiologica 2019 60 8
  • VEGF overexpression is associated with optic nerve involvement and differentiation of retinoblastoma
    Qizheng Wu, Xiao Sun, Guangying Zheng
    Medicine 2018 97 51
  • Clinical applications of high-resolution ocular magnetic resonance imaging
    Keizo Tanitame, Takashi Sone, Yoshiaki Kiuchi, Kazuo Awai
    Japanese Journal of Radiology 2012 30 9

More in this TOC Section

  • Chondrosarcoma vs Synovial Chondromatosis: Imaging
  • WHO Classification Update: Nasal&Skull Base Tumors
  • Peritumoral Signal in Vestibular Schwannomas
Show more Head & Neck

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editor's Choice
  • Fellows' Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Video Articles

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

More from AJNR

  • Trainee Corner
  • Imaging Protocols
  • MRI Safety Corner
  • Book Reviews

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcasts
  • AJNR Scantastics

Resources

  • Turnaround Time
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Submit a Video Article
  • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Statistical Tips
  • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Author Policies
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • News and Updates

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Board Alumni
  • Alerts
  • Permissions
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Advertise with Us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Feedback
  • Terms and Conditions
  • AJNR Editorial Board Alumni

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire