Detection of Local Recurrence in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Using Voxel-Based Color Maps of Initial and Final Area under the Curve Values Derived from DCE-MRI

REFERENCES

1. 1.↵
   2. Agra IM,
   3. Carvalho AL,
   4. Ulbrich FS, et al

   . Prognostic factors in salvage surgery for recurrent oral and oropharyngeal cancer. Head Neck 2006;28:107–13 doi:10.1002/hed.20309 pmid:16388526

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   2. Goodwin WJ Jr.

   . Salvage surgery for patients with recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the upper aerodigestive tract: when do the ends justify the means? Laryngoscope 2000;110(3 Pt 2 Suppl 93):1–18 pmid:10714711

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   2. Kowalski LP,
   3. Bagietto R,
   4. Lara JR, et al

   . Prognostic significance of the distribution of neck node metastasis from oral carcinoma. Head Neck 2000;22:207–14 doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0347(200005)22:3%3C207::AID-HED1%3E3.0.CO;2-9 pmid:10748442

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   2. Carvalho AL,
   3. Magrin J,
   4. Kowalski LP

   . Sites of recurrence in oral and oropharyngeal cancers according to the treatment approach. Oral Dis 2003;9:112–18 doi:10.1034/j.1601-0825.2003.01750.x pmid:12945592

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   2. Yom SS,
   3. Machtay M,
   4. Biel MA, et al

   . Survival impact of planned restaging and early surgical salvage following definitive chemoradiation for locally advanced squamous cell carcinomas of the oropharynx and hypopharynx. Am J Clin Oncol 2005;28:385–92 doi:10.1097/01.coc.0000162422.92095.9e pmid:16062081

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   2. Bahadur S,
   3. Amatya RC,
   4. Kacker SK

   . The enigma of post-radiation oedema and residual or recurrent carcinoma of the larynx and pyriform fossa. J Laryngol Otol 1985;99:763–65 doi:10.1017/S0022215100097620 pmid:4020272

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   2. Cheung PK,
   3. Chin RY,
   4. Eslick GD

   . Detecting residual/recurrent head neck squamous cell carcinomas using PET or PET/CT: systematic review and meta-analysis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2016;154:421–32 doi:10.1177/0194599815621742 pmid:26715675

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   2. Cao Y,
   3. Popovtzer A,
   4. Li D, et al

   . Early prediction of outcome in advanced head-and-neck cancer based on tumor blood volume alterations during therapy: a prospective study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;72:1287–90 doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.08.024 pmid:19028268

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   2. Chikui T,
   3. Kitamoto E,
   4. Kawano S, et al

   . Pharmacokinetic analysis based on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for evaluating tumor response to preoperative therapy for oral cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;36:589–97 doi:10.1002/jmri.23704 pmid:22649040

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    2. Semiz Oysu A,
    3. Ayanoglu E,
    4. Kodalli N, et al

    . Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the differentiation of posttreatment fibrosis from recurrent carcinoma of the head and neck. Clin Imaging 2005;29:307–12 doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2005.01.024 pmid:16153535

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Tomura N,
    3. Omachi K,
    4. Sakuma I, et al

    . Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in radiotherapeutic efficacy in the head and neck tumors. Am J Otolaryngol 2005;26:163–67 doi:10.1016/j.amjoto.2004.11.011 pmid:15858770

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    2. Ishiyama M,
    3. Richards T,
    4. Parvathaneni U, et al

    . Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in head and neck cancer: differentiation of new H&N cancer, recurrent disease, and benign post-treatment changes. Clin Imaging 2015;39:566–70 doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2015.01.016 pmid:25778388

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Furukawa M,
    3. Parvathaneni U,
    4. Maravilla K, et al

    . Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR perfusion imaging of head and neck tumors at 3 Tesla. Head Neck 2013;35:923–29 doi:10.1002/hed.23051 pmid:22887003

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. King AD,
    3. Chow SK,
    4. Yu KH, et al

    . DCE-MRI for pre-treatment prediction and post-treatment assessment of treatment response in sites of squamous cell carcinoma in the head and neck. PLoS One 2015;10:e0144770 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0144770 pmid:26657972

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. Choi YJ,
    3. Lee JH,
    4. Sung YS, et al

    . Value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI to detect local tumor recurrence in primary head and neck cancer patients. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e3698 doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000003698 pmid:27175712

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    2. Choi SH,
    3. Lee JH,
    4. Choi YJ, et al

    . Detection of local tumor recurrence after definitive treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: histogram analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted perfusion MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2017;208:42–47 doi:10.2214/AJR.16.16127 pmid:27680294

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    2. Chung WJ,
    3. Kim HS,
    4. Kim N, et al

    . Recurrent glioblastoma: optimum area under the curve method derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted perfusion MR imaging. Radiology 2013;269:561–68 doi:10.1148/radiol.13130016 pmid:23878286

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Evelhoch JL,
    3. LoRusso PM,
    4. He Z, et al

    . Magnetic resonance imaging measurements of the response of murine and human tumors to the vascular-targeting agent ZD6126. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10:3650–57 doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-03-0417 pmid:15173071

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    2. Suh CH,
    3. Kim HS,
    4. Choi YJ, et al

    . Prediction of pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastomas using the initial and final area under the curves ratio derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted perfusion MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:2278–86 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3634 pmid:23828115

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    2. Yabuuchi H,
    3. Fukuya T,
    4. Tajima T, et al

    . Salivary gland tumors: diagnostic value of gadolinium-enhanced dynamic MR imaging with histopathologic correlation. Radiology 2003;226:345–54 doi:10.1148/radiol.2262011486 pmid:12563124

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
21. 21.↵
    2. Yuan J,
    3. Chow SK,
    4. Yeung DK, et al

    . A five-colour colour-coded mapping method for DCE-MRI analysis of head and neck tumours. Clin Radiol 2012;67:216–23 doi:10.1016/j.crad.2011.07.052 pmid:21939962

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    2. Ailianou A,
    3. Mundada P,
    4. De Perrot T, et al

    . MRI with DWI for the detection of posttreatment head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: why morphologic MRI criteria matter. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018;39:748–55 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A554855 pmid:29449279

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    2. Becker M,
    3. Varoquaux AD,
    4. Combescure C, et al

    . Local recurrence of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck after radio(chemo)therapy: diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI with diffusion-weighted sequences. Eur Radiol 2018;28:651–63 doi:10.1007/s00330-017-4999-1 pmid:28812148

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    2. King AD,
    3. Keung CK,
    4. Yu KH, et al

    . T2-weighted MR imaging early after chemoradiotherapy to evaluate treatment response in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:1237–41 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3378 pmid:23306012

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    2. Gong QY,
    3. Zheng GL,
    4. Zhu HY

    . MRI differentiation of recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma from postradiation fibrosis. Comput Med Imaging Graph 1991;15:423–29 doi:10.1016/0895-6111(91)90170-Z pmid:1773415

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    2. Lell M,
    3. Baum U,
    4. Greess H, et al

    . Head and neck tumors: imaging recurrent tumor and post-therapeutic changes with CT and MRI. Eur J Radiol 2000;33:239–47 doi:10.1016/S0720-048X(99)00120-5 pmid:10699740

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    2. Mukherji SK,
    3. Wolf GT

    . Evaluation of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma after treatment. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003;24:1743–46 pmid:14561596

    FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    2. van der Hoorn A,
    3. van Laar PJ,
    4. Holtman GA, et al

    . Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging techniques for treatment response evaluation in patients with head and neck tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2017;12:e0177986 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0177986 pmid:28542474

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    2. Dao TH,
    3. Rahmouni A,
    4. Campana F, et al

    . Tumor recurrence versus fibrosis in the irradiated breast: differentiation with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1993;187:751–55 doi:10.1148/radiology.187.3.8497625 pmid:8497625

    CrossRefPubMed
30. 30.↵
    2. Kinkel K,
    3. Ariche M,
    4. Tardivon AA, et al

    . Differentiation between recurrent tumor and benign conditions after treatment of gynecologic pelvic carcinoma: value of dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging. Radiology 1997;204:55–63 doi:10.1148/radiology.204.1.9205223 pmid:9205223

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    2. Cheng HL

    . Improved correlation to quantitative DCE-MRI pharmacokinetic parameters using a modified initial area under the uptake curve (mIAUC) approach. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;30:864–72 doi:10.1002/jmri.21916 pmid:19787732

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    2. Galbraith SM,
    3. Lodge MA,
    4. Taylor NJ, et al

    . Reproducibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in human muscle and tumours: comparison of quantitative and semi-quantitative analysis. NMR Biomed 2002;15:132–42 doi:10.1002/nbm.731 pmid:11870909

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science