Literature DB >> 27767330

Prospective comparison of MR with diffusion-weighted imaging, endoscopic ultrasound, MDCT and positron emission tomography-CT in the pre-operative staging of oesophageal cancer: results from a pilot study.

Francesco Giganti1,2, Alessandro Ambrosi2, Maria C Petrone3, Carla Canevari4, Damiano Chiari2,5, Annalaura Salerno1,2, Paolo G Arcidiacono3, Roberto Nicoletti1, Luca Albarello6, Elena Mazza7, Francesca Gallivanone8, Luigi Gianolli4, Elena Orsenigo5, Antonio Esposito1,2, Carlo Staudacher2,5, Alessandro Del Maschio1,2, Francesco De Cobelli1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic performance of MR and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), multidetector CT, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and 18F-FDG (fluorine-18 fludeoxyglucose) positron emission tomography CT (PET-CT) in the pre-operative locoregional staging of oesophageal cancer.
METHODS: 18 patients with oesophageal or Siewert I tumour (9 directly treated with surgery and 9 addressed to chemo-/radiotherapy before) underwent 1.5-T MR and DWI, 64-channel multidetector CT, EUS and PET-CT before (n = 18) and also after neoadjuvant treatment (n = 9). All images were analysed and staged blindly by dedicated operators (seventh TNM edition). Two radiologists calculated independently the apparent diffusion coefficient from the first scan. Results were compared with histopathological findings. After the population had been divided according to local invasion (T1-T2 vs T3-T4) and nodal involvement (N0 vs N+), sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive- and negative-predictive values were calculated and compared. Quantitative measurements from DWI and PET-CT were also analysed.
RESULTS: For T staging, EUS showed the best sensitivity (100%), whereas MR showed the highest specificity (92%) and accuracy (83%). For N staging, MR and EUS showed the highest sensitivity (100%), but none of the techniques showed adequate results for specificity. Overall, MR showed the highest accuracy (66%) for N stage, although this was not significantly different to the other modalities. The apparent diffusion coefficient was different between surgery-only and chemo-/radiotherapy groups (1.90 vs 1.30 × 10-3 mm2 s-1, respectively; p = 0.005)-optimal cut off for local invasion: 1.33 × 10-3 mm2 s-1 (p = 0.05). Difference in standardized uptake value was also very close to conventional levels of statistical significance (8.81 vs 13.97 g cm-3, respectively; p = 0.05)-optimal cut off: 7.97 g cm-3 (p = 0.44).
CONCLUSION: In this pilot study, we have shown that MR with DWI could enrich the current pre-operative work-up for oesophageal cancer and could be used for T and N staging. However, larger studies will need to be carried out before introducing this technique in the standard diagnostic pathway, in order to understand if MR with DWI could change its management and replace more costly or invasive tests such as PET-CT or EUS. Advances in knowledge: This pilot study represents the first effort where the four techniques have been prospectively compared together for oesophageal cancer staging. The combination of MR and DWI could provide important, additional information for staging and initial treatment decision-making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27767330      PMCID: PMC5604902          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20160087

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  28 in total

1.  A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery to surgery alone for resectable esophageal cancer.

Authors:  John D Urschel; Hari Vasan
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.565

Review 2.  Gastrointestinal cancers in Europe.

Authors:  M R B Keighley
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 8.171

Review 3.  Systematic review of the staging performance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in esophageal cancer.

Authors:  H L van Westreenen; M Westerterp; P M M Bossuyt; J Pruim; G W Sloof; J J B van Lanschot; H Groen; J Th M Plukker
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-09-15       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Usefulness of MDCT evaluation of the intraluminal surface of esophageal masses using only effervescent powder without injection of hypotonic agent.

Authors:  Gong Yong Jin; Sang Hee Park; Young Min Han
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2009-07

5.  Endoscopic ultrasound in the staging of tumours of the oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal junction.

Authors:  D G Richards; T H Brown; J M Manson
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 6.  Clinical staging of esophageal carcinoma. CT, EUS, and PET.

Authors:  T W Rice
Journal:  Chest Surg Clin N Am       Date:  2000-08

7.  Diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Aine Sakurada; Taro Takahara; Thomas C Kwee; Tomohiro Yamashita; Seiji Nasu; Tomohiko Horie; Marc Van Cauteren; Yutaka Imai
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-01-27       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Preoperative TN staging of esophageal cancer: comparison of miniprobe ultrasonography, spiral CT and MRI.

Authors:  Ling-Fei Wu; Bing-Zhou Wang; Jia-Lin Feng; Wei-Rong Cheng; Guo-Re Liu; Xiao-Hua Xu; Zhi-Chao Zheng
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Apparent diffusion coefficient modifications in assessing gastro-oesophageal cancer response to neoadjuvant treatment: comparison with tumour regression grade at histology.

Authors:  Francesco De Cobelli; Francesco Giganti; Elena Orsenigo; Michaela Cellina; Antonio Esposito; Giulia Agostini; Luca Albarello; Elena Mazza; Alessandro Ambrosi; Carlo Socci; Carlo Staudacher; Alessandro Del Maschio
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 10.  Imaging strategies in the management of oesophageal cancer: what's the role of MRI?

Authors:  Peter S N van Rossum; Richard van Hillegersberg; Frederiek M Lever; Irene M Lips; Astrid L H M W van Lier; Gert J Meijer; Maarten S van Leeuwen; Marco van Vulpen; Jelle P Ruurda
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-02-13       Impact factor: 5.315

View more
  17 in total

1.  Comparison between free-breathing radial VIBE on 3-T MRI and endoscopic ultrasound for preoperative T staging of resectable oesophageal cancer, with histopathological correlation.

Authors:  Jinrong Qu; Hongkai Zhang; Zhaoqi Wang; Fengguang Zhang; Hui Liu; Zhidan Ding; Yin Li; Jie Ma; Zhongxian Zhang; Shouning Zhang; Yafeng Dong; Lina Jiang; Wei Zhang; Robert Grimm; Berthold Kiefer; Ihab R Kamel; Jianjun Qin; Hailiang Li
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Oesophageal cancer staging: a minefield of measurements-author's reply.

Authors:  Francesco Giganti; Alessandro Ambrosi; Antonio Esposito; Alessandro Del Maschio; Francesco De Cobelli
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-01-30       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Oesophageal cancer staging: a minefield of measurements.

Authors:  Aditya Borakati
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-01-30       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 4.  Does radiomics play a role in the diagnosis, staging and re-staging of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma?

Authors:  Martina Mori; Diego Palumbo; Francesco De Cobelli; Claudio Fiorino
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2022-09-17

5.  Tumour volume of resectable oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma measured with MRI correlates well with T category and lymphatic metastasis.

Authors:  Lan Wu; Jing Ou; Tian-Wu Chen; Rui Li; Xiao-Ming Zhang; Yan-Li Chen; Yu Jiang; Jian-Qiong Yang; Jin-Ming Cao
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  New frontiers in esophageal radiology.

Authors:  Eric J Schmidlin; Ritu R Gill
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-05

7.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of Intratumoral Voxel Heterogeneity as a Potential Response Biomarker: Assessment in a HER2+ Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Xenograft Following Trastuzumab and/or Cisplatin Therapy.

Authors:  Connie Yip; Amanda Weeks; Karen Shaw; Musib Siddique; Fuju Chang; David B Landau; Gary Jr Cook; Vicky Goh
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 4.243

Review 8.  A case report and literature review of barium sulphate aspiration during upper gastrointestinal examination.

Authors:  Gao-Wu Yan; Jiang-Fa Deng; Anup Bhetuwal; Guo-Qing Yang; Quan-Shui Fu; Hong Chen; Na Hu; Hao Zeng; Xiao-Ping Fan; Gao-Wen Yan; Xiao-Lin Wu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 1.817

9.  A Novel Methodology using CT Imaging Biomarkers to Quantify Radiation Sensitivity in the Esophagus with Application to Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Joshua S Niedzielski; Jinzhong Yang; Francesco Stingo; Zhongxing Liao; Daniel Gomez; Radhe Mohan; Mary Martel; Tina Briere; Laurence Court
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-07-20       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  An Esophagogram or Tracheobronchogram? A Review of Barium Sulfate Aspiration.

Authors:  Mohsin Hamid; Waqas Ullah; Mamoon Ur Rashid; Waseem Amjad; Maryam Mukhtar; Abu Hurairah
Journal:  J Investig Med High Impact Case Rep       Date:  2018-10-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.