Literature DB >> 26830420

Complementary value of pre-treatment apparent diffusion coefficient in rectal cancer for predicting tumor recurrence.

Sung Jun Moon1, Seung Hyun Cho2, Gab Chul Kim1, Won Hwa Kim1, Hye Jung Kim1, Kyung-Min Shin1, So Mi Lee1, Jun Seok Park3, Gyu-Seog Choi3, See Hyung Kim4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the complementary prognostic value of pre-treatment tumor apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for the prediction of tumor recurrence in patients with rectal cancer.
METHODS: From March 2012 to March 2013, a total of 128 patients with mid/lower rectal cancer who underwent pre-treatment rectal MRI were enrolled in this retrospective study. Two radiologists in consensus evaluated conventional imaging features (Cimg) in pre-treatment rectal MRI: tumor height from anal verge (≤5 cm vs. >5 cm), T stage (high vs. low), the presence or absence of lymph node metastasis, mesorectal fascia invasion, and extramural venous invasion. The mean tumor ADC values (TumorADC) based on high b-value (0, 1000 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) diffusion weight images were extracted. A multivariate Cox proportional hazard (CPH) regression was performed to evaluate the association of Cimg and TumorADC with the 3-year local recurrence (LR) rate. Predictive performance of two multivariate CPH models (Cimg only vs. Cimg + TumorADC) was compared using Harrell's c index (HCI).
RESULTS: TumorADC (Adjusted HR, 7.830; 95% CI 3.937-15.571) and high T stage (Adjusted HR, 8.039; 95% CI 2.405-26.874) were independently associated with the 3-year LR rate. The CPH model generated with T stage + TumorADC (HCI, 0.820; 95% CI 0.708-0.932) showed significantly higher HCI than that with T stage only (HCI, 0.742; 95% CI 0.594-0.889) (P = 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mid/lower rectal cancer, integrating TumorADC to Cimg increases predictive performance of the CPH model than that with Cimg alone for the prediction of LR within 3 years after surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC); Diffusion-weighted image (DWI); Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); Prognosis; Rectal cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26830420     DOI: 10.1007/s00261-016-0648-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)


  4 in total

Review 1.  Diffusion-weighted imaging in rectal cancer: current applications and future perspectives.

Authors:  Niels W Schurink; Doenja M J Lambregts; Regina G H Beets-Tan
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-03-05       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 2.  Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging: A molecular imaging tool caught between hope, hype and the real world of "personalized oncology".

Authors:  Abhishek Mahajan; Sneha S Deshpande; Meenakshi H Thakur
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2017-06-28

3.  Correlation between apparent diffusion coefficient and tumor-stroma ratio in hybrid 18F-FDG PET/MRI: preliminary results of a rectal cancer cohort study.

Authors:  Shidong Hu; Xiaowei Xing; Jiajin Liu; Baixuan Xu; Xiaohui Du; Xi Liu; Jinhang Li; Wei Jin; Songyan Li; Yang Yan; Da Teng; Boyan Liu; Yufeng Wang
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2022-08

4.  Prognostic Value of Tumor Regression Grade on MR in Rectal Cancer: A Large-Scale, Single-Center Experience.

Authors:  Heera Yoen; Hye Eun Park; Se Hyung Kim; Jeong Hee Yoon; Bo Yun Hur; Jae Seok Bae; Jung Ho Kim; Hyeon Jeong Oh; Joon Koo Han
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 3.500

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.