Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
JCR Impact Factor (IF) – 1.727
Index Copernicus  – 166.39
MEiN – 70 pts

ISSN 1899–5276 (print)
ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2018, vol. 27, nr 8, August, p. 1099–1108

doi: 10.17219/acem/73894

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Diffusion and perfusion MR patterns of central nervous system lymphomas

Małgorzata Neska-Matuszewska1,A,B,C,D,E, Anna Zimny1,A,B,C,E,F, Joanna Bladowska1,A,E, Marek Sąsiadek1,E,F

1 Department of General and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland


Background. Central nervous system lymphomas (CNSLs) are rare tumors which may show variable appearance in standard magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) depending on their origin (primary or secondary) or patients’ immunological status.
Objectives. The aim of the study was to analyze imaging patterns of different CNSLs, using diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI).
Material and Methods. Our material consisted of 16 CNSLs (14 primary, 2 secondary, 13 immunocompetent, 3 immunodeficient) which underwent magnetic resonance (MR) examinations including DWI and T2* dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) perfusion (without a preload in 13 cases, with a preload in 3 subjects). In DWI, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and in PWI, parameters of relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV), relative peak height (rPH) and relative percentage of signal recovery (rPSR) were analyzed within the entire tumor (mean values) and in regions with minimal diffusion (ADCmin) and maximal perfusion values (rCBVmax, rPHmax, rPSRmax).
Results. All CNSLs showed low values of ADCmean (0.70 × 10–3), ADCmin (0.54 × 10–3), rCBVmean (0.80), rCBVmax (1.27), rPHmean (1.05), rPHmax (1.59), as well as high values of rPSRmean (1.99) and rPSRmax (2.41). There were no significant differences in rCBVmax, as well as in all ADC, rPH and rPSR values between primary and secondary CNSLs or between tumors in immunocompetent and immunodeficient patients. Dynamic susceptibility contrast PWI with a preload resulted in significantly higher rCBV, rPH and lower rPSR values.
Conclusion. Despite various MR appearances, both primary and secondary CNSLs in immunocompetent and immunodeficient patients show very typical patterns of restricted diffusion and hypoperfusion with signal intensity curves returning above the baseline. Dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion without a preload is recommended.

Key words

central nervous system lymphomas, diffusion-weighted imaging, perfusion-weighted imaging, magnetic resonance imaging

References (30)

  1. Osborn AG, Salzman KL, Barkovich AJ. Diagnostic imaging: Brain. 2nd ed. Salt Lake City, UT: Amirsys Publishing; 2010.
  2. Haldorsen IS, Krossnes BK, Aarseth JH, et al. Increasing incidence and continued dismal outcome of primary central nervous system lymphoma in Norway 1989–2003: Time trends in a 15-year national survey. Cancer. 2007;110(8):1803–1814.
  3. Haldorsen IS, Espeland A, Larsson EM. Central nervous system lymphoma: Characteristic findings on traditional and advanced imaging. Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(6):984–992.
  4. Miller DC, Hochberg FH, Harris NL, Gruber ML, Louis DN, Cohen H. Pathology with clinical correlations of primary central nervous system non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The Massachusetts General Hospital experience 1958–1989. Cancer. 1994;74(4):1383–1397.
  5. Bhagavathi S, Wilson JD. Primary central nervous system lymphoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008;132(11):1830–1834.
  6. Neska-Matuszewska M, Zimny A, Kałwak K, Sąsiadek MJ. Central nervous system lymphoma in a 3-year-old male suffering from a severe juvenile xanthogranuloma – The usefulness of perfusion weighted imaging and diffusion weighted imaging in the diagnostics of pediatric brain tumors. Pol J Radiol. 2015;80:31–35.
  7. Hill QA, Owen RG. CNS prophylaxis in lymphoma: Who to target and what therapy to use. Blood Rev. 2006;20(6):319–332.
  8. Krogh-Jensen M, Johansen P, D’Amore F. Primary central nervous system lymphoma in immunocompetent individuals: Histology, Epstein-Barr virus genome, Ki-67 proliferation index, p53 and bcl-2 gene expression. Leuk Lymphoma. 1998;30(1–2):131–142.
  9. Senocak E, Oguz KK, Ozgen B, et al. Parenchymal lymphoma of the brain on initial MR imaging: A comparative study between primary and secondary brain lymphoma. Eur J Radiol. 2011;79(2):288–294.
  10. Ferreri AJ, Dolcetti R, Du MQ, et al. Ocular adnexal MALT lymphoma: An intriguing model for antigen-driven lymphomagenesis and microbial-targeted therapy. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(5):835–846.
  11. Cavaliere R, Petroni G, Lopes MB, Schiff D; International primary central nervous system lymphoma collaborative group. Primary central nervous system posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder: An international primary central nervous system lymphoma collaborative group report. Cancer. 2010;116(4):863–870.
  12. Mangla R, Kolar B, Zhu T, Zhonga J, Almasta J, Ekholma S. Percentage of signal recovery derived from MR dynamic susceptibility contrast imaging is useful to differentiate common enhancing malignant lesions of the brain. Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(6):1004–1010.
  13. Cha S, Lupo JM, Chen MH, et al. Differentiation of glioblastoma multiforme and single brain metastasis by peak height and percentage of signal intensity recovery derived from dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging. Am J Neuroradiol. 2007;28(6):1078–1084.
  14. Rizzo L, Crasto SG, Moruno PG, et al. Role of diffusion- and perfusion-weighted MR imaging for brain tumour characterisation. Radiol Med. 2009;114(4):645–646.
  15. Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Tomiguchi S, et al. Posttherapeutic intraaxial brain tumor: The value of perfusion-sensitive contrast-enhanced MR imaging for differentiating tumor recurrence from nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. Am J Neuroradiol. 2000;21(5):901–909.
  16. Zacharia TT, Law M, Naidich TP, Leeds NE. Central nervous system lymphoma characterization by diffusion-weighted imaging and MR spectroscopy. J Neuroimaging. 2008;18(4):411–417.
  17. Calli C, Kitis O, Yunten N, Yurtseven T, Islekel S, Akalin T. Perfusion and diffusion MR imaging in enhancing malignant cerebral tumors. Eur J Radiol. 2006;58(3):394–403.
  18. Provenzale JM, Mukundan S, Barboriak DP. Diffusion-weighted and perfusion MR imaging for brain tumor characterization and assessment of treatment response. Radiol. 2006;239(3):632–649.
  19. Barajas RF, Rubenstein JL, Chang JS, Hwang J, Cha S. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging derived apparent diffusion coefficient is predictive of clinical outcome in primary central nervous system lymphomas. Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;31(1):60–66.
  20. Schroeder PC, Post MJ, Oschatz E, Stadler A, Bruce-Gregorios J, Thurnher MM. Analysis of the utility of diffusion-weighted MRI and apparent diffusion coefficient values in distinguishing central nervous system toxoplasmosis from lymphoma. Neuroradiol. 2006;48(10):715–720.
  21. Guo AC, Cummings TJ, Dash RC, Provenzale JM. Lymphomas and high-grade astrocytomas: Comparison of water diffusibility and histologic characteristics. Radiol. 2002;224(1):177–183.
  22. Rosen B, Belliveau J, Vevea J, Brady TJ. Perfusion imaging with NMR contrast agents. Magn Reson Med. 1990;14(2):249–265.
  23. Zimny A, Sąsiadek M. Contribution of perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation of meningiomas and other extra-axial tumors: Case reports and literature review. J Neurooncol. 2011;103(3):777–783.
  24. Cha S, Knopp EA, Johnson G, Wetzel SG, Litt AW, Zagzag D. Intracranial mass lesions: Dynamic contrast-enhanced susceptibility-weighted echo-planar perfusion MR imaging. Radiol. 2002;223(1):11–29.
  25. Hu LS, Baxter LC, Pinnaduwage DS, et al. Optimized preload leakage-correction methods to improve the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging in posttreatment gliomas. Am J Nuroradiol. 2010;31(1):40–48.
  26. Essig M, Anzalone N, Combs SE, et al. MR imaging of neoplastic central nervous system lesions: Review and recommendations for current practice. Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33(5):803–817.
  27. Law M, Oh S, Johnson G, et al. Perfusion magnetic resonance imaging predicts patients outcome as an adjunct to histopathology: A second reference standard in the surgical and nonsurgical treatment of low-grade gliomas. Neurosurgery. 2006;58(6):1099–1107.
  28. Paulson ES, Schmainda KM. Comparison of dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR methods: Recommendations for measuring relative cerebral blood volume in brain tumors. Radiol. 2008;249(2):601–613.
  29. Runge VM, Kirsch JE, Wells JW, Dunworth JN, Hilaire L, Woolfolk CE. Repeat cerebral blood volume assessment with first-pass MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1994;4(3):457–461.
  30. Toh CH, Wei KC, Chang CN, Ng SH, Wong HF. Differentiation of primary central nervous system lymphomas and glioblastomas: Comparisons of diagnostic performance of dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging without and with contrast-leakage correction. Am J Neuroradiol. 2013;34(6):1145–1149.