Kirthi Sathyakumar1, Anuradha Chandramohan1, Dipti Masih2, Mark Ranjan Jesudasan3, Anna Pulimood2, Anu Eapen1. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India. 2. 2 Department of Pathology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India. 3. 3 Department of General and Colorectal Surgery, Unit II, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify the MRI parameters which best predict complete response (CR) to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and to assess their diagnostic performance. METHODS: This was a prospective study of pre- and post-CRT MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) of 64 patients with LARC who underwent neoadjuvant CRT and subsequent surgery. Histopathological tumour regression grade was the reference standard. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify the best MRI predictors of CR to neoadjuvant CRT, and their diagnostic performance was assessed. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 48 males and 16 females (n = 64), with mean age of 49.48 ± 14.3 years, range of 23-74 years. 11 patients had pathological complete response. The following factors predicted CR on univariate analysis: low initial (pre-CRT) tumour volume on T2 weighted high-resolution (HR) images and DWI, tumour volume-reduction rate (TVRR) of >95% on DWI and CR on post-CRT DWI (ydwiT0) as assessed by the radiologist. However, the best MRI predictors of CR on multivariate regression analysis were CR on post-CRT DWI (ydwiT0) as assessed by the radiologist and TVRR of >95% on DWI, and these parameters had an area under the curve (95% confidence interval) of 0.881 (0.74-1.0) and 0.843 (0.7-0.98), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive value, negative-predictive value and accuracy of DWI in predicting CR was 81.8%, 94.3%, 75%, 96.1% and 76%; the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of TVRR of >95% as a predictor of CR was 80%, 84.1% and 64.1%, respectively; however, this difference was not statistically significant. The interobserver agreement was substantial for ydwiT0. CONCLUSION: Visual assessment of CR on post-CRT DWI and TVRR of >95% on DWI were the best predictors of CR after neoadjuvant CRT in patients with LARC, and the former being more practical can be used in daily practice. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: In rectal cancer, ydwiT0 as assessed by the radiologist was the best and most practical imaging predictor of CR and scores over standard T2W HR images.
OBJECTIVE: To identify the MRI parameters which best predict complete response (CR) to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and to assess their diagnostic performance. METHODS: This was a prospective study of pre- and post-CRT MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) of 64 patients with LARC who underwent neoadjuvant CRT and subsequent surgery. Histopathological tumour regression grade was the reference standard. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify the best MRI predictors of CR to neoadjuvant CRT, and their diagnostic performance was assessed. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 48 males and 16 females (n = 64), with mean age of 49.48 ± 14.3 years, range of 23-74 years. 11 patients had pathological complete response. The following factors predicted CR on univariate analysis: low initial (pre-CRT) tumour volume on T2 weighted high-resolution (HR) images and DWI, tumour volume-reduction rate (TVRR) of >95% on DWI and CR on post-CRT DWI (ydwiT0) as assessed by the radiologist. However, the best MRI predictors of CR on multivariate regression analysis were CR on post-CRT DWI (ydwiT0) as assessed by the radiologist and TVRR of >95% on DWI, and these parameters had an area under the curve (95% confidence interval) of 0.881 (0.74-1.0) and 0.843 (0.7-0.98), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive value, negative-predictive value and accuracy of DWI in predicting CR was 81.8%, 94.3%, 75%, 96.1% and 76%; the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of TVRR of >95% as a predictor of CR was 80%, 84.1% and 64.1%, respectively; however, this difference was not statistically significant. The interobserver agreement was substantial for ydwiT0. CONCLUSION: Visual assessment of CR on post-CRT DWI and TVRR of >95% on DWI were the best predictors of CR after neoadjuvant CRT in patients with LARC, and the former being more practical can be used in daily practice. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: In rectal cancer, ydwiT0 as assessed by the radiologist was the best and most practical imaging predictor of CR and scores over standard T2W HR images.
Authors: Luís Curvo-Semedo; Doenja M J Lambregts; Monique Maas; Thomas Thywissen; Rana T Mehsen; Guido Lammering; Geerard L Beets; Filipe Caseiro-Alves; Regina G H Beets-Tan Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-06-14 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Seung-Gu Yeo; Dae Yong Kim; Ji Won Park; Jae Hwan Oh; Sun Young Kim; Hee Jin Chang; Tae Hyun Kim; Byung Chang Kim; Dae Kyung Sohn; Min Ju Kim Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-05-24 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Uday B Patel; Fiona Taylor; Lennart Blomqvist; Christopher George; Hywel Evans; Paris Tekkis; Philip Quirke; David Sebag-Montefiore; Brendan Moran; Richard Heald; Ashley Guthrie; Nicola Bees; Ian Swift; Kjell Pennert; Gina Brown Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-08-29 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: D M Hyams; E P Mamounas; N Petrelli; H Rockette; J Jones; H S Wieand; M Deutsch; L Wickerham; B Fisher; N Wolmark Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 1997-02 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: A M Mandard; F Dalibard; J C Mandard; J Marnay; M Henry-Amar; J F Petiot; A Roussel; J H Jacob; P Segol; G Samama Journal: Cancer Date: 1994-06-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Doenja M J Lambregts; Miriam M van Heeswijk; Andrea Delli Pizzi; Saskia G C van Elderen; Luisa Andrade; Nicky H G M Peters; Peter A M Kint; Margreet Osinga-de Jong; Shandra Bipat; Rik Ooms; Max J Lahaye; Monique Maas; Geerard L Beets; Frans C H Bakers; Regina G H Beets-Tan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-04-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Seong Ho Park; Seung Hyun Cho; Sang Hyun Choi; Jong Keon Jang; Min Ju Kim; Seung Ho Kim; Joon Seok Lim; Sung Kyoung Moon; Ji Hoon Park; Nieun Seo Journal: Korean J Radiol Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 3.500
Authors: Qiaoyu Xu; Yanyan Xu; Hongliang Sun; Tao Jiang; Sheng Xie; Bee Yen Ooi; Yi Ding Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 3.989
Authors: Anuradha Chandramohan; Umar M Siddiqi; Rohin Mittal; Anu Eapen; Mark R Jesudason; Thomas S Ram; Ashish Singh; Dipti Masih Journal: Eur J Radiol Open Date: 2020-02-25