Antonia Zapf

Background Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is associated with the development of benign (BPNST) and malignant (MPNST) peripheral nerve sheath tumors. Recently described atypical neurofibromas (ANF) are considered pre-malignant precursor lesions to MPNSTs. Previous studies indicate that diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) can reliably discriminate MPNSTs from BPNSTs. We therefore investigated the diagnostic accuracy of DW-MRI for the discrimination of benign, atypical, and malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors. Methods In this prospective explorative single-center phase II diagnostic study, 44 NF1 patients (23 male; 30.1 ± 11.8 years) underwent DW-MRI (b-values 0–800 s/mm²) at 3T. Two radiologists independently assessed mean and minimum apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCmean/min) in areas of largest tumor diameters and ADCdark in areas of lowest signal intensity by manual contouring of the tumor margins of 60 BPNSTs, 13 ANFs, and 21 MPNSTs. Follow-up of ≥ 24 months (BPNSTs) or histopathological evaluation (ANFs + MPNSTs) served as diagnostic reference standard. Diagnostic ADC-based cut-off values for discrimination of the three tumor groups were chosen to yield the highest possible specificity while maintaining a clinically acceptable sensitivity. Results ADC values of pre-malignant ANFs clustered between BPNSTs and MPNSTs. Best BPNST vs. ANF + MPNST discrimination was obtained using ADCdark at a cut-off value of 1.6 × 10−3 mm2/s (85.3% sensitivity, 93.3% specificity), corresponding to an AUC of 94.3% (95% confidence interval: 85.2–98.0). Regarding BPNST + ANF vs. MPNST, best discrimination was obtained using an ADCdark cut-off value of 1.4 × 10−3 mm2/s (83.3% sensitivity, 94.5% specificity). Conclusions DW-MRI using ADCdark allows specific and noninvasive discrimination of benign, atypical, and malignant nerve sheath tumors in NF1.

Diagnostic accuracy studies assess the sensitivity and specificity of a new index test in relation to an established comparator or the reference standard. The development and selection of the index test are usually assumed to be conducted prior to the accuracy study. In practice, this is often violated, for instance, if the choice of the (apparently) best biomarker, model or cutpoint is based on the same data that is used later for validation purposes. In this work, we investigate several multiple comparison procedures which provide family-wise error rate control for the emerging multiple testing problem. Due to the nature of the co-primary hypothesis problem, conventional approaches for multiplicity adjustment are too conservative for the specific problem and thus need to be adapted. In an extensive simulation study, five multiple comparison procedures are compared with regard to statistical error rates in least-favourable and realistic scenarios. This covers parametric and non-parametric methods and one Bayesian approach. All methods have been implemented in the new open-source R package cases which allows us to reproduce all simulation results. Based on our numerical results, we conclude that the parametric approaches (maxT and Bonferroni) are easy to apply but can have inflated type I error rates for small sample sizes. The two investigated Bootstrap procedures, in particular the so-called pairs Bootstrap, allow for a family-wise error rate control in finite samples and in addition have a competitive statistical power.