BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study seeks to: (a) quantify radiologic-pathologic discrepancy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma by comparing tumor size on conventional computed tomography (C-CT) and 3-dimensional CT (3D-CT) to corresponding pathologic specimens; and (b) to identify clinico-pathologic characteristics predictive of radiologic-pathologic discrepancy to assist radiotherapy planning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-three patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma and preoperative C-CT and volume-rendered 3D-CT imaging within 6 weeks of resection were identified. Maximum tumor diameter (MTD) was measured on pathology, C-CT, and 3D-CT and compared for each patient as well as among different clinico-pathologic subgroups. RESULTS: There was a trend toward C-CT underestimation of MTD compared to final pathology (p=0.08), but no significant difference between 3D-CT MTD and pathology (p=0.54). Pathologic tumor size was significantly underestimated by C-CT in patients with larger pathologic tumor size (>3.0 cm, p=0.0001), smaller tumor size on C-CT (<3.0 cm, p=0.003), higher CA19-9 (>90 U/mL, p=0.008), and location in the pancreatic head (p=0.015). A model for predicting pathologic MTD using C-CT MTD and CA19-9 level was generated. CONCLUSIONS: 3D-CT may allow for more accurate contouring of pancreatic tumors than C-CT. Patients with the above clinico-pathologic characteristics may require expanded margins relative to tumor size estimates on C-CT during radiotherapy planning.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study seeks to: (a) quantify radiologic-pathologic discrepancy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma by comparing tumor size on conventional computed tomography (C-CT) and 3-dimensional CT (3D-CT) to corresponding pathologic specimens; and (b) to identify clinico-pathologic characteristics predictive of radiologic-pathologic discrepancy to assist radiotherapy planning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-three patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma and preoperative C-CT and volume-rendered 3D-CT imaging within 6 weeks of resection were identified. Maximum tumor diameter (MTD) was measured on pathology, C-CT, and 3D-CT and compared for each patient as well as among different clinico-pathologic subgroups. RESULTS: There was a trend toward C-CT underestimation of MTD compared to final pathology (p=0.08), but no significant difference between 3D-CT MTD and pathology (p=0.54). Pathologic tumor size was significantly underestimated by C-CT in patients with larger pathologic tumor size (>3.0 cm, p=0.0001), smaller tumor size on C-CT (<3.0 cm, p=0.003), higher CA19-9 (>90 U/mL, p=0.008), and location in the pancreatic head (p=0.015). A model for predicting pathologic MTD using C-CT MTD and CA19-9 level was generated. CONCLUSIONS: 3D-CT may allow for more accurate contouring of pancreatic tumors than C-CT. Patients with the above clinico-pathologic characteristics may require expanded margins relative to tumor size estimates on C-CT during radiotherapy planning.
Authors: Morten Hoyer; Henrik Roed; Lisa Sengelov; Anders Traberg; Lars Ohlhuis; Jorgen Pedersen; Hanne Nellemann; Anne Kiil Berthelsen; Frey Eberholst; Svend Aage Engelholm; Hans von der Maase Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: James D Murphy; Saroja Adusumilli; Kent A Griffith; Michael E Ray; Mark M Zalupski; Theodore S Lawrence; Edgar Ben-Josef Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-03-26 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: K Aoki; S Okada; N Moriyama; H Ishii; H Nose; M Yoshimori; T Kosuge; H Ozaki; F Wakao; K Takayasu Journal: Jpn J Clin Oncol Date: 1994-04 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Michael G House; Charles J Yeo; John L Cameron; Kurt A Campbell; Richard D Schulick; Steven D Leach; Ralph H Hruban; Karen M Horton; Elliot K Fishman; Keith D Lillemoe Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2004 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Timothy M Pawlik; Daniel Laheru; Ralph H Hruban; Joann Coleman; Christopher L Wolfgang; Kurt Campbell; Syed Ali; Elliot K Fishman; Richard D Schulick; Joseph M Herman Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2008-05-07 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: J L Humphris; D K Chang; A L Johns; C J Scarlett; M Pajic; M D Jones; E K Colvin; A Nagrial; V T Chin; L A Chantrill; J S Samra; A J Gill; J G Kench; N D Merrett; A Das; E A Musgrove; R L Sutherland; A V Biankin Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2012-01-11 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Katherine Y Fan; Avani S Dholakia; Aaron T Wild; Zheng Su; Amy Hacker-Prietz; Rachit Kumar; Mary Hodgin; Charles C Hsu; Dung T Le; Ana De Jesus-Acosta; Luis A Diaz; Daniel A Laheru; Ralph H Hruban; Elliot K Fishman; Todd D Brown; Timothy M Pawlik; Christopher L Wolfgang; Phuoc T Tran; Joseph M Herman Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Michaël Noë; Neda Rezaee; Kaushal Asrani; Michael Skaro; Vincent P Groot; Pei-Hsun Wu; Matthew T Olson; Seung-Mo Hong; Sung Joo Kim; Matthew J Weiss; Christopher L Wolfgang; Martin A Makary; Jin He; John L Cameron; Denis Wirtz; Nicholas J Roberts; G Johan A Offerhaus; Lodewijk A A Brosens; Laura D Wood; Ralph H Hruban Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2018-04-22 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: Christopher L Wolfgang; Joseph M Herman; Daniel A Laheru; Alison P Klein; Michael A Erdek; Elliot K Fishman; Ralph H Hruban Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2013-07-15 Impact factor: 508.702