Advertisement

Noninvasive prediction of HCC with progenitor phenotype based on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI

  • Jie Chen
  • Zhenru Wu
  • Chunchao Xia
  • Hanyu Jiang
  • Xijiao Liu
  • Ting Duan
  • Likun Cao
  • Zheng Ye
  • Zhen Zhang
  • Ling Ma
  • Bin SongEmail author
  • Yujun ShiEmail author
Oncology
  • 120 Downloads

Abstract

Objectives

To explore the noninvasive prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with progenitor phenotype based on gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Methods

This retrospective study included 115 surgery-proven HCCs with preoperative gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI from August 2015 to September 2018. Image features were reviewed. Quantitative image analysis was performed using histogram analysis. HCC with progenitor phenotype was defined as positive for either cytokeratin 19 (CK19) or epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) expression. Statistically significant variables for identifying HCCs with progenitor phenotype were determined at multivariate analyses. ROC analyses were used to determined cutoff values and the diagnostic performance of significant variables and combinations. Prediction nomogram was constructed based on multivariate analysis.

Results

At multivariate regression analyses, AFP ≥ 155.25 ng/mL (p < 0.001), skewness on T2WI ≤ 1.10 (p = 0.024), uniformity on pre-T1WI ≤ 0.91 (p = 0.024), irregular tumor margin (p = 0.006), targetoid appearance (p = 0.001), and the absence of mosaic architecture (p = 0.014) were significant predictors of HCCs expressing progenitor cell markers. Combing any three of those significant variables, it provides a diagnostic accuracy of 0.86 (95% CI 0.78–0.92) with sensitivity of 0.97 (95% CI 0.86–1.00), and specificity of 0.74 (95% CI 0.63–0.83). The C-index of the regression coefficient-based nomogram was 0.94 (95% CI 0.91–0.98).

Conclusions

Noninvasive prediction of HCCs with progenitor phenotype can be achieved with high accuracy by integrated interpretation of biochemical and radiological information, representing a handy tool for precise patient management and the prediction of prognosis.

Key Points

• Qualitative image features of irregular tumor margin, targetoid appearance, and the absence of mosaic architecture are significant predictors of hepatocellular carcinoma with progenitor phenotype.

• Quantitative analyses using whole-lesion histogram analysis provides additional information for the prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma with progenitor phenotype.

• Noninvasive prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma with progenitor phenotype can be achieved with high accuracy by integrated interpretation of clinical information and qualitative and quantitative imaging analyses.

Keywords

Hepatocellular carcinoma Cytokeratin 19 Epithelial cell adhesion molecule Magnetic resonance imaging Nomogram 

Abbreviations

ADC

Apparent diffusion coefficient

AFP

Alpha fetal protein

CI

Confidence interval

CK19

Cytokeratin 19

EpCAM

Epithelial adhesion molecules

HBP

Hepatobiliary phase

HCC

Hepatocellular carcinoma

MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging

Pre-T1WI

Pre-enhancement T1-weighted imaging

SI

Signal intensity

T2WI

T2-weighted imaging

Notes

Funding

This study has received funding from the Science and Technology Support Program of Sichuan Province (Grant Number 2017SZ0003).

Compliance with ethical standards

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Bin Song.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Statistics and biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this study.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.

Ethical approval

An Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• retrospective

• diagnostic or prognostic study

• performed at one institution

Supplementary material

330_2019_6414_MOESM1_ESM.docx (21 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 21 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2017) Cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin 67:7–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhang H, Han J, Xing H et al (2018) Sex difference in recurrence and survival after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter study. Surgery.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2018.08.031
  3. 3.
    Imamura H, Matsuyama Y, Tanaka E et al (2003) Risk factors contributing to early and late phase intrahepatic recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy. J Hepatol 38:200–207CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Portolani N, Coniglio A, Ghidoni S et al (2006) Early and late recurrence after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: prognostic and therapeutic implications. Ann Surg 243:229–235CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Calderaro J, Couchy G, Imbeaud S et al (2017) Histological subtypes of hepatocellular carcinoma are related to gene mutations and molecular tumour classification. J Hepatol 67:727–738CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lo RC, Ng IO (2013) Hepatic progenitor cells: their role and functional significance in the new classification of primary liver cancers. Liver Cancer 2:84–92CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Joo I, Kim H, Lee JM (2015) Cancer stem cells in primary liver cancers: pathological concepts and imaging findings. Korean J Radiol 16:50–68CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Uenishi T, Kubo S, Yamamoto T et al (2003) Cytokeratin 19 expression in hepatocellular carcinoma predicts early postoperative recurrence. Cancer Sci 94:851–857CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhuang PY, Zhang JB, Zhu XD et al (2008) Two pathologic types of hepatocellular carcinoma with lymph node metastasis with distinct prognosis on the basis of CK19 expression in tumor. Cancer 112:2740–2748CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yamashita T, Forgues M, Wang W et al (2008) EpCAM and alpha-fetoprotein expression defines novel prognostic subtypes of hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Res 68:1451–1461CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tan PS, Nakagawa S, Goossens N et al (2016) Clinicopathological indices to predict hepatocellular carcinoma molecular classification. Liver Int 36:108–118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guan DX, Shi J, Zhang Y et al (2015) Sorafenib enriches epithelial cell adhesion molecule-positive tumor initiating cells and exacerbates a subtype of hepatocellular carcinoma through TSC2-AKT cascade. Hepatology 62:1791–1803CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jeong HT, Kim MJ, Kim YE, Park YN, Choi GH, Choi JS (2012) MRI features of hepatocellular carcinoma expressing progenitor cell markers. Liver Int 32:430–440PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Choi SY, Kim SH, Park CK et al (2018) Imaging features of gadoxetic acid-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR imaging for identifying cytokeratin 19-positive hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective observational study. Radiology 286:897–908CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hu XX, Wang WT, Yang L et al (2019) MR features based on LI-RADS identify cytokeratin 19 status of hepatocellular carcinomas. Eur J Radiol 113:7–14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Choi Y, Kim SH, Youn IK, Kang BJ, Park WC, Lee A (2017) Rim sign and histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient values on diffusion-weighted MRI in triple-negative breast cancer: comparison with ER-positive subtype. PLoS One 12:e0177903CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yuan M, Pu XH, Xu XQ et al (2017) Lung adenocarcinoma: assessment of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation status based on extended models of diffusion-weighted image. J Magn Reson Imaging 46:281–289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hu XX, Yang ZX, Liang HY et al (2017) Whole-tumor MRI histogram analyses of hepatocellular carcinoma: correlations with Ki-67 labeling index. J Magn Reson Imaging 46:383–392CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moriya T, Saito K, Tajima Y et al (2017) 3D analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient histograms in hepatocellular carcinoma: correlation with histological grade. Cancer Imaging 17:1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    American College of Radiology (2018) CT/MRI LI-RADS® v2018. American College of Radiology. Available via https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/RADS/LI-RADS/LI-RADS-2018-Core.pdf?la=en. Accessed November 2018
  21. 21.
    Rhee H, Nahm JH, Kim H et al (2016) Poor outcome of hepatocellular carcinoma with stemness marker under hypoxia: resistance to transarterial chemoembolization. Mod Pathol 29:1038–1049CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rhee H, An C, Kim HY, Yoo JE, Park YN, Kim MJ (2019) Hepatocellular carcinoma with irregular rim-like arterial phase hyperenhancement: more aggressive pathologic features. Liver Cancer 8:24–40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liu R, Shen Y, Nan K et al (2015) Association between expression of cancer stem cell markers and poor differentiation of hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis (PRISMA). Medicine (Baltimore) 94:e1306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kudo M (2009) Multistep human hepatocarcinogenesis: correlation of imaging with pathology. J Gastroenterol 44(Suppl 19):112–118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Li M, Xin Y, Fu S et al (2016) Corona enhancement and mosaic architecture for prognosis and selection between of liver resection versus transcatheter arterial chemoembolization in single hepatocellular carcinomas >5 cm without extrahepatic metastases: an imaging-based retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore) 95:e2458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cannella R, Furlan A (2018) Mosaic architecture of hepatocellular carcinoma. Abdom Radiol (NY) 43:1847–1848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yoneda N, Matsui O, Kobayashi S et al (2019) Current status of imaging biomarkers predicting the biological nature of hepatocellular carcinoma. Jpn J Radiol 37:191–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Locatelli E, Li Y, Monaco I et al (2019) A novel theranostic gold nanorods- and adriamycin-loaded micelle for EpCAM targeting, laser ablation, and photoacoustic imaging of cancer stem cells in hepatocellular carcinoma. Int J Nanomedicine 14:1877–1892CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.West China School of MedicineSichuan UniversityChengduChina
  2. 2.Laboratory of Pathology, West China HospitalSichuan UniversityChengduChina
  3. 3.Department of Radiology, West China HospitalSichuan UniversityChengduChina
  4. 4.Application Advanced TeamGE HealthcareShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations