Zhan-Zhao Fu1, Yong Peng2, Li-Yan Cao3, Yan-Sheng Chen4, Kun Li5, Bao-Hong Fu3. 1. Department of Oncology, the First Hospital of Qinhuangdao, Qinhuangdao 066000, P.R. China. Electronic address: qhd1h_fzz@126.com. 2. Department of Bioengineering, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066000, P.R. China. 3. Department of Oncology, the First Hospital of Qinhuangdao, Qinhuangdao 066000, P.R. China. 4. Division of NMR Research, the First Hospital of Qinhuangdao, Qinhuangdao 066000, P.R. China. 5. Department of Chemical Engineering, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066000, P.R. China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the clinical significance of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) in monitoring the efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CT) treatments in cervical cancer. METHOD: In order to identify relevant high quality clinical cohort studies reporting the use of DWI in cervical cancers, the following electronic databases in English and Chinese languages were comprehensively searched: MEDLINE, Science Citation Index database, Cochrane Library Database, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Current Contents Index; Chinese Biomedical Database, Chinese Journal Full-Text Database. All selected studies were published prior to March 2014, and data extracted from these studies were analyzed using STATA 12.0 statistical software. RESULTS: We initially retrieved 196 articles (79 Chinese articles and 117 English articles) through database searches and finally selected sixteen cohort studies for this meta-analysis. The 16 studies contained a combined total of 517 subjects, and all selected studies reported the mean ADC value (10(-3) mm(2)/s) in DWI in cervical cancer patients treated with RT and CT. Combined standardized mean difference (SMD) suggested that the mean post-RT and mean post-CT ADC values were significantly higher than the mean pre-RT and mean pre-CT ADC values, respectively, in cervical cancer patients (SMD=2.95, 95% CI=2.19-3.72, P<0.001). Ethnicity-stratified analysis revealed that increased ADC values were observed post-RT and post-CT in both Caucasian (SMD=1.44, 95% CI=0.93-1.95, P<0.001) and Asian populations (SMD=3.32, 95% CI=2.42-4.22, P<0.001), compared with the mean ADC values before RT and CT, respectively, in the two subgroups. Further, subgroup analysis based on b-value revealed that higher ADC values were found in cervical cancer patients after RT and CT, compared to before RT and CT treatment, with both b value≤900 (SMD=3.71, 95% CI=2.35-5.07, P<0.001) and >900 (SMD=2.55, 95% CI=1.78-3.32, P<0.001). The mean ADC value in patients without residual tumor post-RT and post-CT treatment was significantly higher than seen in patients with residual tumors (SMD=0.80, 95% CI=0.49-1.12, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis revealed a significant correlation between mean ADC values and the clinical response to RT and CT treatment. Thus, ADC values in DWI may be effective in evaluating the clinical outcome of treatments in cervical cancer patients.
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the clinical significance of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) in monitoring the efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CT) treatments in cervical cancer. METHOD: In order to identify relevant high quality clinical cohort studies reporting the use of DWI in cervical cancers, the following electronic databases in English and Chinese languages were comprehensively searched: MEDLINE, Science Citation Index database, Cochrane Library Database, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Current Contents Index; Chinese Biomedical Database, Chinese Journal Full-Text Database. All selected studies were published prior to March 2014, and data extracted from these studies were analyzed using STATA 12.0 statistical software. RESULTS: We initially retrieved 196 articles (79 Chinese articles and 117 English articles) through database searches and finally selected sixteen cohort studies for this meta-analysis. The 16 studies contained a combined total of 517 subjects, and all selected studies reported the mean ADC value (10(-3) mm(2)/s) in DWI in cervical cancerpatients treated with RT and CT. Combined standardized mean difference (SMD) suggested that the mean post-RT and mean post-CT ADC values were significantly higher than the mean pre-RT and mean pre-CT ADC values, respectively, in cervical cancerpatients (SMD=2.95, 95% CI=2.19-3.72, P<0.001). Ethnicity-stratified analysis revealed that increased ADC values were observed post-RT and post-CT in both Caucasian (SMD=1.44, 95% CI=0.93-1.95, P<0.001) and Asian populations (SMD=3.32, 95% CI=2.42-4.22, P<0.001), compared with the mean ADC values before RT and CT, respectively, in the two subgroups. Further, subgroup analysis based on b-value revealed that higher ADC values were found in cervical cancerpatients after RT and CT, compared to before RT and CT treatment, with both b value≤900 (SMD=3.71, 95% CI=2.35-5.07, P<0.001) and >900 (SMD=2.55, 95% CI=1.78-3.32, P<0.001). The mean ADC value in patients without residual tumor post-RT and post-CT treatment was significantly higher than seen in patients with residual tumors (SMD=0.80, 95% CI=0.49-1.12, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis revealed a significant correlation between mean ADC values and the clinical response to RT and CT treatment. Thus, ADC values in DWI may be effective in evaluating the clinical outcome of treatments in cervical cancerpatients.
Authors: A L Valentini; M Miccò; B Gui; M Giuliani; E Rodolfino; A M Telesca; T Pasciuto; A Testa; M A Gambacorta; G Zannoni; V Rufini; A Giordano; V Valentini; G Scambia; R Manfredi Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-01-09 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Jennifer C Ho; Pamela K Allen; Priya R Bhosale; Gaiane M Rauch; Clifton D Fuller; Abdallah S R Mohamed; Michael Frumovitz; Anuja Jhingran; Ann H Klopp Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2016-11-17 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jennifer C Ho; Penny Fang; Carlos E Cardenas; Abdallah S R Mohamed; Clifton D Fuller; Pamela K Allen; Priya R Bhosale; Michael M Frumovitz; Anuja Jhingran; Ann H Klopp Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2019-03-11 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Kathryn E Keenan; Jana G Delfino; Kalina V Jordanova; Megan E Poorman; Prathyush Chirra; Akshay S Chaudhari; Bettina Baessler; Jessica Winfield; Satish E Viswanath; Nandita M deSouza Journal: Med Phys Date: 2021-09-29 Impact factor: 4.506
Authors: Anette Hauge; Catherine S Wegner; Jon-Vidar Gaustad; Trude G Simonsen; Lise Mari K Andersen; Einar K Rofstad Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2017-11-11