PURPOSE: To evaluate whether a pharmacokinetic analysis is useful for monitoring the response of oral cancer to chemoradiotherapy (CRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients were included. They underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) before and after CRT. The DCE-MRI data were analyzed using a Tofts and Kermode (TK) model. The histological evaluation of the effects of CRT was performed according to Ohboshi and Shimosato's classification. RESULTS: None of the pre-CRT parameters were significantly different between the responders and nonresponders. The post-CRT volume of the extravascular extracellular space (EES) per unit volume of tissue (v(e) ) of responders (0.397 ± 0.080) was higher than that of nonresponders (0.281 ± 0.076) (P = 0.01). The change of the v(e) between the pre- and post-CRT of the responders (0.154 ± 0.093) was larger than that of the nonresponders (0.033 ± 0.073) (P = 0.001). Therefore, the increase in the v(e) strongly suggested a good tumor response to CRT, which reflected an increase of the EES secondary to the destruction of the cancer nest. The changes in the volume transfer constant (K(trans) ) were significantly different between the responders and nonresponders (P = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Both the increase of the v(e) and the elevation of permeability (K(trans) ) were indicative of a good tumor response to CRT. The pharmacokinetic analysis had potential for monitoring the histopathological response to CRT.
PURPOSE: To evaluate whether a pharmacokinetic analysis is useful for monitoring the response of oral cancer to chemoradiotherapy (CRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients were included. They underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) before and after CRT. The DCE-MRI data were analyzed using a Tofts and Kermode (TK) model. The histological evaluation of the effects of CRT was performed according to Ohboshi and Shimosato's classification. RESULTS: None of the pre-CRT parameters were significantly different between the responders and nonresponders. The post-CRT volume of the extravascular extracellular space (EES) per unit volume of tissue (v(e) ) of responders (0.397 ± 0.080) was higher than that of nonresponders (0.281 ± 0.076) (P = 0.01). The change of the v(e) between the pre- and post-CRT of the responders (0.154 ± 0.093) was larger than that of the nonresponders (0.033 ± 0.073) (P = 0.001). Therefore, the increase in the v(e) strongly suggested a good tumor response to CRT, which reflected an increase of the EES secondary to the destruction of the cancer nest. The changes in the volume transfer constant (K(trans) ) were significantly different between the responders and nonresponders (P = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Both the increase of the v(e) and the elevation of permeability (K(trans) ) were indicative of a good tumor response to CRT. The pharmacokinetic analysis had potential for monitoring the histopathological response to CRT.
Authors: T Chikui; E Kitamoto; Y Kami; S Kawano; K Kobayashi; T Kamitani; M Obara; K Yoshiura Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: J Y Lee; K L Cheng; J H Lee; Y J Choi; H W Kim; Y S Sung; S R Chung; K H Ryu; M S Chung; S Y Kim; S-W Lee; J H Baek Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-07-18 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Stephanie L Barnes; Anna G Sorace; Mary E Loveless; Jennifer G Whisenant; Thomas E Yankeelov Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2015-08-30 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Huyen T Nguyen; Guang Jia; Zarine K Shah; Kamal Pohar; Amir Mortazavi; Debra L Zynger; Lai Wei; Xiangyu Yang; Daniel Clark; Michael V Knopp Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 4.813