Differentiation of benign from malignant adnexal masses by functional 3 tesla MRI techniques: diffusion-weighted imaging and time-intensity curves of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI
other
OA: gold
CC-BY-4.0
AI-generated summary
High DWI signal intensity and type 3 time-intensity curves differentiate malignant from benign adnexal masses, with type 3 TIC being more accurate than DWI or ADC values.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the accuracy of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value, and time-intensity curve (TIC) type analysis derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging (DCE-MRI) in differentiating benign from malignant adnexal masses.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 47 patients with 56 adnexal masses (27 malignant and 29 benign) underwent DWI and DCE-MRI examinations, prior to surgery. DWI signal intensity, mean ADC value, and TIC type were determined for all the masses.
RESULTS: High signal intensity on DWI and type 3 TIC were helpful in differentiating benign from malignant adnexal masses (p<0.001). The mean ADC value was significantly lower in malignant adnexal masses (p<0.001). An ADC value<1.20?10-3 mm2/s may be the optimal cutoff for differentiating between benign and malignant tumors. The negative predictive value for low signal intensity on DWI, and type 1 TIC were 100%. The pairwise comparison among the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves showed that the area under the curve (AUC) of TIC was significantly larger than the AUCs of DWI and ADC (p<0.001 for comparison of TIC and DWI, p<0.02 for comparison of TIC and ADC value).
CONCLUSIONS: DWI, ADC value and TIC type derived from DCE-MRI are all sensitive and relatively specific methods for differentiating benign from malignant adnexal masses. By comparing these functional MR techniques, TIC was found to be more accurate than DWI and ADC.
Full text
8,103 characters
· extracted from
oa-html
· click to expand
References
- Arikan SK, Kasap B, Yetimalar H, et al (2014). Impact of prognostic factors on survival rates in patients with ovarian carcinoma. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 6087-94. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.15.6087
- Arun-Muthuvel V, Jaya V (2014). Pre-operative evaluation of ovarian tumors by risk of malignancy index, CA125 and ultrasound. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 2929-32. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.6.2929
- Buckley DL, Drew PJ, Mussurakis S, et al (1997). Microvessel density of invasive breast cancer assessed by dynamic Gd-DTPA enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging, 7, 461-4. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.1880070302
- Busard MP, Mijatovic V, van Kuijk C, et al (2010). Magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of (deep infiltrating) endometriosis: the value of diffusion-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging, 31, 1117-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.22139
- Fujii S, Kakite S, Nishihara K, et al (2008). Diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted imaging in differentiating benign from malignant ovarian lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging, 28, 1149-56. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21575
- Gupta T, Gupta S, Bhatia P, Gupta N (2013). Pelvic tuberculosis mimicking ovarian malignancy: A case report. ICJP, 24, 456-8.
- Jacobs I, Oram D, Fairbanks J, et al (1990). A risk of malignancy index incorporating CA 125, ultrasound and menopausal status for the accurate preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 97, 922-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1990.tb02448.x
- Karadag B, Kocak M, Kayikcioglu F, et al (2014). Risk for malignant and borderline ovarian neoplasms following basic preoperative evaluation by ultrasonography, ca125 level and age. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 8489-93. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.19.8489
- Katayama M, Masui T, Kobayashi S, et al (2002). Diffusionweighted echo planar imaging of ovarian tumors: is it useful to measure apparent diffusion coefficients? J Comput Assist Tomogr, 26, 250-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004728-200203000-00015
- Kunpalin Y, Triratanachat S, Tantbirojn P (2014). Proportion of ovarian cancers in overall ovarian masses in Thailand. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 7929-34. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.18.7929
- Li W, Chu C, Cui Y, et al (2012). Diffusion-weighted MRI: a useful technique to discriminate benign versus malignant ovarian surface epithelial tumors with solid and cystic components. Abdom Imaging, 37, 897-903. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-011-9814-x
- Mohaghegh P, Rockall AG (2012). Imaging strategy for early ovarian cancer: characterization of adnexal masses with conventional and advanced imaging techniques. Radiographics, 32, 1751-73. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.326125520
- Outwater EK, Siegelman ES, Hunt JL (2001). Ovarian teratomas: tumor types and imaging characteristics. Radiographics, 21, 475-90. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiographics.21.2.g01mr09475
- Ozbay PO, Ekinci T, Caltekin MD, et al (2015). Comparative evaluation of the risk of malignancy index scoring systems (1-4) used in differential diagnosis of adnexal masses. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 16, 345-9. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.1.345
- Padhani AR, Gapinski CJ, Macvicar DA, et al (2000). Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation with morphology and tumour stage, histological grade and PSA. Clin Radiol, 55, 99-109. https://doi.org/10.1053/crad.1999.0327
- Pagani E, Bizzi A, Di Salle F, et al (2008). Basic concepts of advanced MRI techniques. Neurol Sci, 29, 290-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-008-1001-7
- Poncelet E, Delpierre C, Kerdraon O, et al (2013). Value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for tissue characterization of ovarian teratomas: correlation with histopathology. Clin Radiol, 68, 909-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2013.03.029
- Siegelman ES, Oliver ER (2012). MR imaging of endometriosis:ten imaging pearls. Radiographics, 32, 1675-91. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.326125518
- Simsek HS, Tokmak A, Ozgu E, et al (2014). Role of a risk of malignancy index in clinical approaches to adnexal masses. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 7793-7. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.18.7793
- Takeuchi M, Matsuzaki K, Nishitani H (2010). Diffusionweighted magnetic resonance imaging of ovarian tumors: differentiation of benign and malignant solid components of ovarian masses. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 34, 173-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0b013e3181c2f0a2
- Tantipalakorn C, Wanapirak C, Khunamornpong S, et al (2014). IOTA simple rules in differentiating between benign and malignant ovarian tumors. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 5123-6. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.13.5123
- Thomassin-Naggara I, Bazot M, Darai E, et al (2008a). Epithelial ovarian tumors: value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and correlation with tumor angiogenesis. Radiology, 248, 148-59. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2481071120
- Thomassin-Naggara I, Darai E, Cuenod CA, et al (2009). Contribution of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for predicting benignity of complex adnexal masses. Eur Radiol, 19, 1544-52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1299-4
- Thomassin-Naggara I, Darai E, Cuenod CA, et al (2008b). Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging:a useful tool for characterizing ovarian epithelial tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging, 28, 111-20. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21377
- Thomassin-Naggara I, Toussaint I, Perrot N, et al (2011). Characterization of complex adnexal masses: value of adding perfusion- and diffusion-weighted MR imaging to conventional MR imaging. Radiology, 258, 793-803. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10100751
- Timmerman D, Valentin L, Bourne TH, et al (2000). Terms, definitions and measurements to describe the sonographic features of adnexal tumors: a consensus opinion from the international ovarian tumor analysis (IOTA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 16, 500-5. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-0705.2000.00287.x
- Togashi K, Nishimura K, Kimura I, et al (1991). Endometrial cysts: diagnosis with MR imaging. Radiology, 180, 73-8. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.180.1.2052726
- Wakefield JC, Downey K, Kyriazi S, et al (2013). New MR techniques in gynecologic cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 200, 249-60. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.8932
- Weinstein S, Rosen M (2010). Breast MR imaging: current indications and advanced imaging techniques. Radiol Clin North Am, 48, 1013-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2010.06.011
- Winarto H, Laihad BJ, Nuranna L (2014). Modification of cutoff values for HE4, CA125, the risk of malignancy index, and the risk of malignancy algorithm for ovarian cancer detection in Jakarta, Indonesia. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 1949-53. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.5.1949
- Yavuzcan A, Caglar M, Ozgu E, et al (2013). Should cutoff values of the risk of malignancy index be changed for evaluation of adnexal masses in Asian and pacific populations? Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 14, 5455-9. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.9.5455
- Zhang P, Cui Y, Li W, et al (2012). Diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted imaging with conventional MR imaging for differentiating complex solid and cystic ovarian tumors at 1.5T. World J Surg Oncol, 10, 237. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7819-10-237
Cited by
- Susceptibility Weighted With Quantitative Phase Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Differentiation of Various Stages of Hemorrhage and Calcification in Female Pelvic Pathologies vol.41, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000000551
- Diagnostic accuracy of DWI in patients with ovarian cancer vol.96, pp.19, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000006659
- Diffusion-Weighted Imaging and Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Findings in Osteosarcoma Versus Normal Muscle vol.In Press, pp.In Press, 2017, https://doi.org/10.5812/iranjradiol.13937
- Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging features of ovarian fibrothecoma vol.14, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2017.6228
- Surgical challenges in the treatment of perimenopausal and postmenopausal endometriosis vol.21, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/13697137.2018.1439913
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Ask this paper
Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works
Condition tags
MeSH descriptors
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.
Source provenance
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-08-12T06:07:16.479679+00:00
- pubmed
- last seen: 2026-05-13T22:17:52.213533+00:00
- unpaywall
- last seen: 2026-05-14T19:30:52.867331+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0
· commercial use OK
· attribution required
Courtesy of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Courtesy of the U.S. National Library of Medicine