T Seierstad1, K H Hole1,2, K K Grøholt3, S Dueland4, A H Ree2,5, K Flatmark6,7, K R Redalen5,8. 1. 1 Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 2. 2 Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 3. 3 Department of Pathology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 4. 4 Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 5. 5 Department of Oncology, Division of Medicine, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. 6. 6 Department of Tumor Biology, Institute For Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 7. 7 Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 8. 8 Department of Radiation Biology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate if MRI-assessed tumour volumetry correlates with histological tumour response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and subsequent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). METHODS: Data from 69 prospectively enrolled patients with LARC receiving NACT followed by CRT and radical surgery were analysed. Whole-tumour volumes were contoured in T2 weighted MR images obtained pre-treatment (VPRE), after NACT (VNACT) and after the full course of NACT followed by CRT (VCRT). VPRE, VNACT and tumour volume changes relative to VPRE, ΔVNACT and ΔVCRT were calculated and correlated to histological tumour regression grade (TRG). RESULTS: 61% of good histological responders (TRG 1-2) to NACT followed by CRT were correctly predicted by combining VPRE < 10.5 cm(3), ΔVNACT > -78.2% and VNACT < 3.3 cm(3). The highest accuracy was found for VNACT, with 55.1% sensitivity given 100% specificity. The volume regression after completed NACT and CRT (VCRT) was not significantly different between good and poor responders (TRG 1-2 vs TRG 3-5). CONCLUSION: MRI-assessed small tumour volumes after NACT correlated with good histological tumour response (TRG 1-2) to the completed course of NACT and CRT. Furthermore, by combining tumour volume measurements before, during and after NACT, more good responders were identified. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: MRI volumetry may be a tool for early identification of good and poor responders to NACT followed by CRT and surgery in LARC in order to aid more individualized, multimodal treatment.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate if MRI-assessed tumour volumetry correlates with histological tumour response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and subsequent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). METHODS: Data from 69 prospectively enrolled patients with LARC receiving NACT followed by CRT and radical surgery were analysed. Whole-tumour volumes were contoured in T2 weighted MR images obtained pre-treatment (VPRE), after NACT (VNACT) and after the full course of NACT followed by CRT (VCRT). VPRE, VNACT and tumour volume changes relative to VPRE, ΔVNACT and ΔVCRT were calculated and correlated to histological tumour regression grade (TRG). RESULTS: 61% of good histological responders (TRG 1-2) to NACT followed by CRT were correctly predicted by combining VPRE < 10.5 cm(3), ΔVNACT > -78.2% and VNACT < 3.3 cm(3). The highest accuracy was found for VNACT, with 55.1% sensitivity given 100% specificity. The volume regression after completed NACT and CRT (VCRT) was not significantly different between good and poor responders (TRG 1-2 vs TRG 3-5). CONCLUSION: MRI-assessed small tumour volumes after NACT correlated with good histological tumour response (TRG 1-2) to the completed course of NACT and CRT. Furthermore, by combining tumour volume measurements before, during and after NACT, more good responders were identified. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: MRI volumetry may be a tool for early identification of good and poor responders to NACT followed by CRT and surgery in LARC in order to aid more individualized, multimodal treatment.
Authors: Anders Jakobsen; John Ploen; Té Vuong; Ane Appelt; Jan Lindebjerg; Soren R Rafaelsen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-05-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J V Schou; F O Larsen; L Rasch; D Linnemann; J Langhoff; E Høgdall; D L Nielsen; K Vistisen; A Fromm; B V Jensen Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2012-04-02 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Gina Brown; Catherine J Richards; Michael W Bourne; Robert G Newcombe; Andrew G Radcliffe; Nicholas S Dallimore; Geraint T Williams Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: S M E Engelen; M Maas; M J Lahaye; J W A Leijtens; C L H van Berlo; R L H Jansen; S O Breukink; C H C Dejong; C J H van de Velde; R G H Beets-Tan; G L Beets Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2013-04-06 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Marc J Gollub; Ivana Blazic; David D B Bates; Naomi Campbell; Andrea Knezevic; Mithat Gonen; Patricio Lynn; Martin R Weiser; Julio Garcia-Aguilar; Andreas M Hötker; Andrea Cercek; Leonard Saltz Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-10-02 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Stefano Trebeschi; Joost J M van Griethuysen; Doenja M J Lambregts; Max J Lahaye; Chintan Parmar; Frans C H Bakers; Nicky H G M Peters; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-07-13 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Stephan B Dreyer; Arfon G M T Powell; Stephen T McSorley; Ashita Waterston; James J Going; Joanne Edwards; Donald C McMillan; Paul G Horgan Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2016-11-21 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Sebastian Meltzer; Kine Mari Bakke; Karina Lund Rød; Anne Negård; Kjersti Flatmark; Arne Mide Solbakken; Annette Torgunrud Kristensen; Anniken Jørlo Fuglestad; Christian Kersten; Svein Dueland; Therese Seierstad; Knut Håkon Hole; Lars Gustav Lyckander; Finn Ole Larsen; Jakob Vasehus Schou; Dawn Patrick Brown; Hanna Abrahamsson; Kathrine Røe Redalen; Anne Hansen Ree Journal: Clin Transl Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-12-02