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
    • Advancing NeuroMRI with High-Relaxivity Contrast Agents
    • 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
    • Advancing NeuroMRI with High-Relaxivity Contrast Agents
    • 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


Improved Turnaround Times | Median time to first decision: 12 days

Research ArticleHead and Neck Imaging
Open Access

Diffusion-Weighted Imaging to Assess HPV-Positive versus HPV-Negative Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: The Importance of b-Values

V. Lenoir, B.M.A. Delattre, Y. M’RaD, C. De Vito, T. de Perrot and M. Becker
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2022, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A7521
V. Lenoir
aFrom the Divisions of Radiology (V.L., B.M.A.D., Y.M., T.d.P., M.B.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for V. Lenoir
B.M.A. Delattre
aFrom the Divisions of Radiology (V.L., B.M.A.D., Y.M., T.d.P., M.B.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for B.M.A. Delattre
Y. M’RaD
aFrom the Divisions of Radiology (V.L., B.M.A.D., Y.M., T.d.P., M.B.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Y. M’RaD
C. De Vito
bClinical Pathology (C.D.V.), Diagnostic Department, Geneva University Hospitals, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for C. De Vito
T. de Perrot
aFrom the Divisions of Radiology (V.L., B.M.A.D., Y.M., T.d.P., M.B.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for T. de Perrot
M. Becker
aFrom the Divisions of Radiology (V.L., B.M.A.D., Y.M., T.d.P., M.B.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for M. Becker
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • FIG 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 1.

    ADC histogram changes caused by b-value choice illustrated in 2 different patients with OPSCC. T2 and corresponding b=1000 images with tumor ROIs (in yellow) are shown on the left side of the figure. The histograms in blue were obtained from the pixel values of the HPV+ OPSCC ROI, and the histograms in orange, from the pixel values of the HPV– OPSCC ROI. ADC mean values are indicated in blue for the HPV+ OPSCC and in red for the HPV– OPSCC, respectively. On ADC maps with b=0, HPV+ OPSCC histograms have lower ADC mean values, a slender peak (leptokurtic shape), and a right skew, whereas HPV– OPSCC histograms have higher ADC mean values, lower kurtosis (flatter shape), and a more symmetric shape (Gaussian distribution). On ADC maps with b=0, the histograms of the 2 tumors can be easily distinguished one from another. This is hardly possible on perfusion-insensitive ADC maps (ADCb100-1000, ADCb500-1000, ADCb750-1000) due to overlapping metrics.

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

    Color-coded maps in 2 different patients with OPSCC (same patients as in Fig 1) illustrating changes in ADC pixel values and distribution caused by the choice of b-values. T2 images and corresponding b=1000 images with tumor ROIs (in yellow) are shown on the left. The upper 2 rows on the right show the color-coded ADC maps of the HPV+ OPSCC, while the lower 2 rows show the respective maps of the HPV– OPSCC. For all images, the same color map with the same quantitative scale (0–3000 ×10−6mm2/s) was used to display the original gray levels. Note the clearly visible difference between HPV+ versus HPV– OPSCC on the ADC maps with b=0, with HPV+ OPSCC having lower ADCs and less ROI heterogeneity than HPV– OPSCC. This difference disappears on maps calculated with higher b-values only, and the distinction between the 2 tumor types is visually hardly possible on maps calculated with b ≥ 500. The 2 readers correctly identified the HPV+ and the HPV– OPSCC on the first 7 ADC maps; they failed, however, to correctly distinguish between the 2 tumor types on the last 2 ADC maps.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1:

    Choice of b-values for each calculated ADC map

    No. of b-ValuesUsed b-ValuesMonoexponential Model
    201000ADCb0–1000
    40501001000ADCb0–50–100–1000
    50501007501000ADCb0–50–100–750–1000
    60501005007501000ADCb0–50–100–500–750–1000
    307501000ADCb0–750–1000
    405007501000ADCb0–500–750–1000
    21001000ADCb100–1000
    25001000ADCb500–1000
    27501000ADC b750–1000
    • View popup
    Table 2:

    Patient and tumor characteristics

    HPV– OPSCC (n = 23)HPV+ OPSCC (n = 11)P Value
    Average age (range) (yr)62 (50–82)62 (48–85).986a
    Sex
     Women7 (7/23, 30%)6 (6/11, 55%)
     Men16 (16/23, 70%)5 (5/11, 45%).329b
    Tumor location
     Oropharynx23 (23/23, 100%)11 (11/11, 100%)
    T classification according to AJCC 20184,5.944c
     T13 (3/23, 13%)0 (0/11, 0%)
     T23 (3/23, 13%)2 (2/11, 18%)
     T35 (5/23, 22%)2 (2/11, 18%)
     T412 (12/23, 52%)7 (7/11, 64%)
    N classification according to AJCC 20184,5.138c
     N05 (5/23, 22%)0 (0/11, 0%)
     N13 (3/23, 13%)5 (5/11, 45%)
     N215 (15/23, 65%)6 (6/11, 55%)
     N30 (0/23, 0%)0 (0/11, 0%)
    M classification according to AJCC 20184,5.630c
     M022 (22/23, 96%)11 (11/11, 100%)
     M11 (1/23, 4%)0 (0/11, 0%)
    Tumor keratinization at histopathology.140b
     Present14 (14/23, 61%)7 (7/11, 64%)
     Absent9 (9/23, 39%)4 (4/11, 36%)
    Mean proliferation index, MIB-1 (range) (%)55 (15–90)69 (50–90).126d
    • ↵a T test.

    • ↵b Pearson χ2 test.

    • ↵c Fisher exact test.

    • ↵d Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test.

    • View popup
    Table 3:

    Comparison of ADC histograms in HPV+ versus HPV– OPSCC for each b-value combinationa

    HPV– OPSCCHPV+ OPSCCP Valueb
    ADC Meanc
     ADCb0–10001117 (SD, 151)977 (SD, 183).038
     ADCb0–50–100–10001029 (SD, 176)924 (SD, 185).164
     ADCb0–50–100–750–10001051 (SD, 168)925 (SD, 176).077
     ADCb0–50–100–500–750–10001061 (SD, 167)935 (SD, 176).084
     ADCb0–750–10001141 (SD, 156)983 (SD, 177).017
     ADCb0–500–750–10001127 (SD, 156)970 (SD, 177).017
     ADCb100–1000947 (SD, 245)875 (SD, 206).214
     ADCb500–1000838 (SD, 255)758 (SD, 287).176
     ADCb750–1000 900 (SD, 360)942 (SD, 340).942
    Skewness
     ADCb0–10000.156 (SD, 0.453)0.486 (SD, 0.444).031
     ADCb0–50–100–10000.266 (SD, 0.442)0.393 (SD, 0.48).258
     ADCb0–50–100–750–10000.331 (SD, 0.526)0.363 (SD, 0.609).445
     ADCb0–50–100–500–750–10000.31 (SD, 0.542)0.363 (SD, 0.649).383
     ADCb0–750–10000.177 (SD, 0.518)0.506 (SD, 0.483).046
     ADCb0–500–750–10000.2 (SD, 0.496)0.499 (SD, 0.458).034
     ADCb100-10000.136 (SD, 0.427)0.069 (SD, 0.486).468
     ADCb500–10000.229 (SD, 0.431)0.103 (SD, 0.47).537
     ADCb750–10000.672 (SD, 0.739)0.435 (SD, 0.383).214
    Excess kurtosis
     ADCb0–10000.12 (SD, 0.71)1.22 (SD, 0.45)< .001
     ADCb0–50–100–10000.34 (SD, 0.81)1.36 (SD, 0.69)< .001
     ADCb0–50–100–750–10000.57 (SD, 1.25)1.64 (SD, 1.15).008
     ADCb0–50–100–500–750–10000.55 (SD, 1.25)1.74 (SD, 1.23).007
     ADCb0–750–10000.21 (SD, 0.81)1.22 (SD, 0.58).002
     ADCb0–500–750–10000.2 (SD, 0.84)1.19 (SD, 0.53).002
     ADCb100–10000.51 (SD, 1.2)1.22 (SD, 1.09).019
     ADCb500–10000.19 (SD, 0.84)0.7 (SD, 1.1).188
     ADCb750–10000.76 (SD, 2.18)0.3 (SD, 1.09).942
    • ↵a Data are means.

    • ↵b Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test.

    • ↵c Units in ×10−6mm2/s.

    • View popup
    Table 4:

    Diagnostic performance of ADC maps capable of distinguishing HPV+ from HPV– OPSCC on the basis of ADC mean, skewness, and kurtosisa

    FeatureAUCP ValueTPFPTNFNSensitivitySpecificityAccuracyOptimal Threshold
    ADCb0–1000
     ADC mean0.723.019871630.7270.6950.7061062.429b
     ADC skewness0.731.016861730.7270.7390.7350.349
     ADC kurtosisc0.893<.0011141901.0000.8260.8820.640
    ADCb0–750–1000
     ADC mean0.755.009871630.7270.6950.7061088.702b
     ADC skewness0.715.023851830.7270.7830.7650.500
     ADC kurtosisc0.826.0011051810.9090.7830.8230.651
    ADCb0–500–750–1000
     ADC mean0.755.009851830.7270.7830.7651034.222b
     ADC skewness0.727.009841930.7270.8260.7940.525
     ADC kurtosisc0.826.0011051810.9090.7830.8230.620
    ADCb100–1000
     ADC mean0.636.105881530.7270.6520.676958.089b
     ADC skewness0.581.231791440.6360.6090.6180.133
     ADC kurtosisc0.751.010971620.8180.6960.7350.484
    • Note:—TP indicates true-positive; FP, false-positive; TN, true-negative; FN, false-negative.

    • ↵a For comparison, the diagnostic performance of the perfusion-insensitive map recommended in the literature14 is equally shown. P values to distinguish HPV+ from HPV– OPSCC were calculated with the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated using the optimal threshold (Youden index from receiver operating curve analysis).

    • ↵b ADC mean thresholds in x10−6mm2/s.

    • ↵c Excess kurtosis.

PreviousNext
Back to top
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.
Diffusion-Weighted Imaging to Assess HPV-Positive versus HPV-Negative Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: The Importance of b-Values
(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
V. Lenoir, B.M.A. Delattre, Y. M’RaD, C. De Vito, T. de Perrot, M. Becker
Diffusion-Weighted Imaging to Assess HPV-Positive versus HPV-Negative Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: The Importance of b-Values
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2022, DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A7521

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
Diffusion-Weighted Imaging to Assess HPV-Positive versus HPV-Negative Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: The Importance of b-Values
V. Lenoir, B.M.A. Delattre, Y. M’RaD, C. De Vito, T. de Perrot, M. Becker
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2022, DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A7521
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
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

More in this TOC Section

  • Diagnostic Performance of US in Neck Node NIRADS 2
  • Hydrops Herniation into the Semicircular Canals
  • ASL Sensitivity for Head and Neck Paraganglioma
Show more HEAD AND NECK IMAGING

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