Investigating difficult to detect pancreatic lesions: Characterization of benign pancreatic islet cell tumors using multiparametric pancreatic 3-T MRI

Introduction Pancreatic islet-cell tumors (PICT) often present with atypical signal-characteristics and are often missed on preoperative imaging. The aim of this study is to provide a multiparametric PICT characterization and investigate factors impeding PICT detection. Material and methods This is a detailed MRI analysis of a prospective, monocenter study, including 49 consecutive patients (37 female, 12 male; median age 50) with symptoms due to endogenous hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia (EHH) and mostly negative prior-imaging. All patients received a 3-T MRI and a 68Ga-DOTA-exendin-4-PET/CT. Pooled accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and inter-reader agreement were calculated. Reference-standard was histopathology and 68Ga-DOTA-Exendin-4-PET/CT in one patient who refused surgery. For PICT analyses, 34 patients with 49 PICTs (48 histologically proven; one 68Ga-DOTA-exendin-4-PET/CT positive) were assessed. Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) Magnetic Resonance Images (MRI) with Golden-Angle-Radial-Sparse-Parallel (GRASP) reconstruction, enabling imaging at high spatial and temporal resolution, was used to assess enhancement-patterns of PICTs. Tumor-to-background (T2B) ratio for each sequence and the employed quantitative threshold for conspicuity of PICTs were analyzed in regard to prediction of true-positive PICTs. Results Evaluation of 49 patients revealed a pooled lesion-based accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of 70.3%, 72.9% and 62.5%, respectively. Mean PICT size was 12.9±5.3mm for detected, 9.0±2.9mm for undetected PICTs (p-value 0.0112). In-phase T1w detected the most PICT (67.3%). Depending on the sequence, PICTs were isointense and poorly visible in 29–68%. Only 2/41(4.9%) PICTs showed typical signal-characteristics across T1w, T2w, DWI and ceT1w combined. 66.6% of PICTs enhanced simultaneously to the parenchyma, 17.8% early and 15.6% late. Predictor screening analysis showed number of sequences detecting a PICT, lesion size and in-phase T1w T2B ratio had the highest contribution for detecting a true-positive PICT. Conclusion The majority of PICTs enhance simultaneously to surrounding parenchyma, present with atypical signal-characteristics and thus are poorly visible. In non-enhancing PICTs, radiologists should search for small lesions most likely conspicuous on unenhanced T1w or DWI.

Systematic comparison of sporadic and syndromic pancreatic islet cell tumors

Pancreatic islet cell tumors (ICTs) occur as sporadic neoplasias or as a manifestation of multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) and von Hippel–Lindau disease (VHL). Molecular classification of ICTs is mandatory for timely diagnosis and surveillance. Systematic comparison of VHL-ICTs and sporadic ICTs has been lacking. Our registry-based approaches used the German NET-Registry with 259 patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), who were primarily diagnosed with NETs, and the German VHL-Registry with 485 molecular genetically confirmed patients who had undergone magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography of the abdomen. All patients provided blood DNA for testing of the MEN1 and VHL genes for intragenic mutations and large deletions. In the NET-Registry, 9/101 patients (8.9%) with ICTs had germline mutations, 8 in MEN1 and 1 in VHL. In the VHL-Registry, prevalence of NETs was 52/487 (10.6%), and all were ICTs. Interestingly, of those with VHL p.R167W, 47% developed ICTs, compared to 2% of those with p.Y98H. In total, there were 92 truly sporadic, i.e. mutation-negative ICT patients. Comparing these with the 53 VHL-ICT patients, the statistically significant differences were predominance of female gender (P=0.01), multifocal ICTs (P=0.0029), and lower malignancy rate (P<0.001) in VHL-ICTs compared to sporadic cases. VHL was prevalent in <0.5% of NETs, while NETs occur in ∼10% of VHL, virtually exclusively as ICTs, which are rarely the first presentation. Patients with NETs should not be subjected to genetic testing of the VHL gene, unless they have multifocal ICTs, other VHL-associated tumors, and/or a family history for VHL.