Fifty-seventh annual meeting of the American association of physicists in medicine
SU-E-I-84: Accuracy Comparison of Multi-Modality Image-Based Volumes of Rodent Solid Tumors Using In-Air Micro-CT Image Volume
Tumor volume is considered as a better predictor for therapy response monitoring and tumor staging over Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) or World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. In this study, the accuracy of subcutaneous rodent tumor volumes using preclinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) and ultrasound (US) equipment and with an external caliper was compared using in-air micro-CT image volume of excised tumors determined as reference tumor volume in our prior study.
MR, US and micro-CT images of subcutaneous SCC4 head and neck tumor xenografts were acquired 4, 6, 9, 11 and 13 days after tumor cell inoculation. Before MR and US scans, caliper measurements were made. After tumors were excised, in-air micro-CT imaging and ex vivo caliper measurements were performed. Tumor volumes were calculated using formula V = (π/6)*a*b*c where a, b and c are the maximum diameters in three perpendicular dimensions determined by the three image modalities and caliper, and compared with reference tumor volume by linear regression analysis as well as Bland-Altman plots. A one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test was also performed to compare volumes among caliper measurements.
The correlation coefficients (R2) of the regression lines for tumor volumes measured by the three imaging modalities and caliper were 0.9939, 0.9669, 0.9806, 0.9274, 0.9619 and 0.9819 for MRI, US and micro-CT, caliperbeforeMRI, caliperbeforeUS and ex vivo caliper respectively. In Bland-Altman plots, the average of tumor volume difference from reference tumor volume (bias) was significant for caliper and micro- CT, but not for MRI and US. Comparison of caliper measurements showed a significant difference (p < 0.05).
Using the in-air micro-CT image volume, tumor volume measured by MRI was the most accurate among the three imaging modalities. In vivo caliper volume measurements showed unreliability while ex vivo caliper measurements reduced errors.