| Literature DB >> 25389460 |
Kyle C Cuneo1, Thomas L Chenevert2, Edgar Ben-Josef3, Mary U Feng3, Joel K Greenson4, Hero K Hussain2, Diane M Simeone5, Matthew J Schipper6, Michelle A Anderson7, Mark M Zalupski8, Mahmoud Al-Hawary2, Craig J Galban9, Alnawaz Rehemtulla3, Felix Y Feng3, Theodore S Lawrence3, Brian D Ross2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In the current study we examined the ability of diffusion MRI (dMRI) to predict pathologic response in pancreatic cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25389460 PMCID: PMC4225651 DOI: 10.1016/j.tranon.2014.07.005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Oncol ISSN: 1936-5233 Impact factor: 4.243
Patient and tumor characteristics
| Subject | Age | Stage | Response | Pre ADC | Post ADC | Δ ADC | OS (mo) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 52 | pT2N1M0 | III | 152 | 171 | 19 | 22.4 |
| 2 | 59 | pT3N1M0 | III | 162 | 44.8 | ||
| 3 | 59 | pT3N1M0 | III | 168 | 122 | -46 | 25.6 |
| 4 | 68 | pT3N0M0 | I | 83 | 185 | 102 | 26.5 |
| 5 | 66 | pT2N0M0 | IIB | 140 | 10.0 | ||
| 6 | 64 | pT4NxM0 | 136 | 3.3 | |||
| 7 | 71 | pT3N1M0 | IIA | 119 | 170 | 51 | 28.6 |
| 8 | 55 | pT4NxM0 | 141 | 178 | 36 | 12.0 | |
| 9 | 56 | pTxNxM1 | 181 | 186 | 5 | 6.1 | |
| 10 | 50 | pT3N1M0 | IIB | 160 | 179 | 19 | 10.9 |
Response Criteria, I: < 10% tumor cell destruction, IIA: 10–50% tumor cell destruction, IIB: 51–90% tumor cell destruction, III: < 10% viable appearing tumor cells present.
Mean tumor ADC, units × 10− 5 mm2/s determined using b values 0, 100, 500, 800 s/mm2.
Figure 1ADC maps obtained from patients on the study. The region of interest (tumor) is outlined. Representative tumors with a low (A, 119 x 10− 5 mm2/s) and high (B, 168 x 10− 5 mm2/s) mean ADC are shown.
Figure 2Relationship between pretreatment mean tumor ADC and subsequent histopathologic response after chemoradiation therapy. The percentage of tumor cell destruction was converted from the grading system described by Evans DB et al. (19) to a numerical scale. Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated to describe the relationship between ADC and percent tumor cell destruction.
Figure 3Pretreatment ADC histograms generated for each tumor with the corresponding amount of tumor cell destruction (percentage listed) seen after chemoradiation therapy and surgical resection. A shift towards a higher ADC value was associated with improved pathologic response to chemoradiation.
Figure 4Comparison of pretreatment ADC and change in size on CT scan in patients showing a pathologic response (> 90% tumor cell destruction) and in nonresponding patients (> 10% viable tumor). Mean pretreatment tumor ADC was significantly higher in responding patients compared to nonresponding patients. Whereas, tumor size did not change on CT imaging after treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiation.
Figure 5One stainless steel and two nitinol (nickel titanium alloy) stents were placed in fixed diameter plastic cylinders to simulate a bile duct. Stents were scanned in a water phantom with T2 and diffusion weighted MRI sequences. High levels of artifact were seen in the diffusion sequence with the stainless steel stent but not with the nitinol containing stents.