Abdominal Radiology

, Volume 44, Issue 3, pp 950–957 | Cite as

PET/CT in brachytherapy early response evaluation of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma xenografts: comparison with apparent diffusion coefficient from diffusion-weighted MR imaging

  • Yu LiuEmail author
  • Min Liu
  • Xiaona Liu
  • Yan Zhou



To evaluate the feasibility of using PET/CT and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) to monitor the early response of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) xenografts to brachytherapy, and to determine whether maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) correlate with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC).

Materials and Methods

SW1990 human PDAC were subcutaneously implanted in 20 nude mice. They were randomly divided into 125-Iodine (125I) seeds and blank seeds group. PET/CT and DW-MRI were performed at pretreatment and 5 days after therapy. SUVmax and ADC values were calculated, respectively. The correlation between SUVmax and ADC values was analyzed by the Pearson correlation test.


The SUVmax were significantly decreased between pretreatment and 5 days after 125I seeds treatment (p < 0.001) and between two groups (p < 0.001). And the ADC values were significantly increased between pretreatment and 5 days after 125I seeds treatment (p < 0.001) and between two groups (p < 0.001). While in the bank seeds group, there were no significantly difference between pretreatment and after treatment in SUVmax and ADC values (p = 0.057; p = 0.397). SUVmax and ADC correlated significantly and negatively before treatment in both groups (r = − 0.964, R2 = 0.929, p < 0.001; r = − 0.917, R2 = 0.841, p < 0.001) and after treatment in the blank seeds group (r = − 0.944, R2 = 0.891, p < 0.001). But after 125I seeds treatment there was no significant correlation between SUVmax and ADC (r = − 0.388, R2 = 0.151, p = 0.268).


The PET/CT and DW-MRI are capable of monitoring the early response of PDAC xenografts to brachytherapy. The significantly inverse correlation between pretreatment SUVmax and ADC suggests that PET/CT and DW-MRI might play complementary roles for therapy assessment.


Iodine-125 seeds Brachytherapy Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma Xenografts 18F-FDG PET/CT Diffusion-weighted MRI 



This work was supported by Grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81401455).

Compliance with ethical standards


Yu Liu has received Grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (81401455). For the remaining authors none were declared.

Conflict of interest

All authors have no any financial and personal relationships with other people or organisations that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work.


  1. 1.
    Niu H, Zhang X, Wang B, et al. (1058) The clinical utility of image-guided iodine-125 seed in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. Br J Radiol 2016(89):20150573Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ergul N, Gundogan C, Tozlu M, et al. (2014) Role of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer; comparison with multidetector row computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic ultrasonography. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 33(3):159–164Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Min M, Lee MT, Lin P, et al. (1058) Assessment of serial multi-parametric functional MRI (diffusion-weighted imaging and R2*) with (18)F-FDG-PET in patients with head and neck cancer treated with radiation therapy. Br J Radiol 2016(89):20150530Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tsuji K, Kishi S, Tsuchida T, et al. (2015) Evaluation of staging and early response to chemotherapy with whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI in malignant lymphoma patients: a comparison with FDG-PET/CT. J Magn Reson Imaging 41(6):1601–1607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Meier R, Braren R, Kosanke Y, et al. (2014) Multimodality multiparametric imaging of early tumor response to a novel antiangiogenic therapy based on anticalins. PLoS ONE 9(5):e94972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang T, Zhang F, Meng Y, et al. (2013) Diffusion-weighted MRI monitoring of pancreatic cancer response to radiofrequency heat-enhanced intratumor chemotherapy. NMR Biomed 26(12):1762–1767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tsuchida T, Morikawa M, Demura Y, et al. (2013) Imaging the early response to chemotherapy in advanced lung cancer with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging compared to fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography. J Magn Reson Imaging 38(1):80–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu Y, Liu X, Gao W, et al. (2017) Combining DCE-MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT for monitoring the efficacy of 125I seed brachytherapy in nude mice bearing pancreatic cancer xenografts. Chin J Med Phys 34(01):1–6 (Chinese)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shah N, Zhai G, Knowles JA, et al. (2012) (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging detects therapy efficacy of anti-EMMPRIN antibody and gemcitabine in orthotopic pancreatic tumor xenografts. Mol Imaging Biol 14(2):237–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu Y, Wang Y, Tang W, et al. (2018) Multiparametric MR imaging detects therapy efficacy of radioactive seeds brachytherapy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma xenografts. Radiol Med 123(7):481–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lim TY, Stafford RJ, Kudchadker RJ, et al. (2016) MRI characterization of cobalt dichloride-N-acetyl cysteine (C4) contrast agent marker for prostate brachytherapy. Tumour Biol 37(2):2219–2223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hu S, Shi X, Chen Y, et al. (1058) Functional imaging of interstitial brachytherapy in pancreatic carcinoma xenografts using spectral CT: how does iodine concentration correlate with standardized uptake value of (18)FDG-PET-CT? Br J Radiol 2016(89):20150573Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Arumugam T, Paolillo V, Young D, et al. (2014) Preliminary evaluation of 1’-[(18)F]fluoroethyl-β-d-lactose ([(18)F]FEL) for detection of pancreatic cancer in nude mouse orthotopic xenografts. Phys Med Biol 59(10):2505–2516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schmid-Tannwald C, Schmid-Tannwald CM, Morelli JN, et al. (2013) Comparison of abdominal MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging to 68 Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT in detection of neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 40(6):897–907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moestue SA, Huuse EM, Lindholm EM, et al. (2013) Low-molecular contrast agent dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI and diffusion-weighted (DW)-MRI in early assessment of bevacizumab treatment in breast cancer xenografts. J Magn Reson Imaging 38(5):1043–1053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Okada KI, Hirono S, Kawai M, et al. (2017) Value of apparent diffusion coefficient prior to neoadjuvant therapy is a predictor of histologic response in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 24(3):161–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sakane M, Tatsumi M, Kim T, et al. (2015) Correlation between apparent diffusion coefficients on diffusion-weighted MRI and standardized uptake value on FDG-PET/CT in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Acta Radiol 56(9):1034–1041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Regier M, Derlin T, Schwarz D, et al. (2012) Diffusion weighted MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): does the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) correlate with tracer uptake (SUV)? Eur J Radiol 81(10):2913–2918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brandmaier P, Purz S, Bremicker K, et al. (2015) Simultaneous [18F]FDG-PET/MRI: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and standardized uptake value (SUV) in primary and recurrent cervical cancer. PLoS ONE 10(11):e0141684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jeong JH, Cho IH, Chun KA, et al. (2016) Correlation between apparent diffusion coefficients and standardized uptake values in hybrid (18)F-FDG PET/MR: preliminary results in rectal cancer. Nucl Med Mol Imaging 50(2):150–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Goense L, Heethuis SE, van Rossum PSN, et al. (2018) Correlation between functional imaging markers derived from diffusion-weighted MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT in esophageal cancer. Nucl Med Commun 39(1):60–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Radiology, Ninth People’s HospitalShanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Department of CTThe People’s Hospital of Xiang YunDaliChina
  3. 3.Yantai Affiliated Hospital of Binzhou Medical UniversityShandongChina

Personalised recommendations