| Literature DB >> 28443205 |
Jennifer B Permuth1,2, Jung W Choi3, Dung-Tsa Chen4, Kun Jiang5, Gina DeNicola6, Jian-Nong Li4, Domenico Coppola5, Barbara A Centeno5, Anthony Magliocco5, Yoganand Balagurunathan6, Nipun Merchant7, Jose G Trevino8, Daniel Jeong3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Intra-abdominal fat is a risk factor for pancreatic cancer (PC), but little is known about its contribution to PC precursors known as intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs). Our goal was to evaluate quantitative radiologic measures of abdominal/visceral obesity as possible diagnostic markers of IPMN severity/pathology.Entities:
Keywords: Abdominal obesity; computed tomography; pancreatic cancer; pre-malignant lesions
Year: 2017 PMID: 28443205 PMCID: PMC5365183 DOI: 10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2017.0006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Biol Med ISSN: 2095-3941 Impact factor: 4.248
Characteristics of IPMN cases in the study cohort (n=34)
| Variable | Benign IPMNs ( | Malignant IPMNs ( | |
| Data represent counts (percentages) unless otherwise indicated. Counts may not add up to the total due to missing values, and percentages may not equal 100 due to rounding. | |||
| Age at diagnosis, mean (SD), years | 67.5 (10.9) | 71.8 (11.3) | 0.143 |
| Gender | 0.032 | ||
| Male | 3 (18) | 10 (59) | |
| Female | 14 (82) | 7 (41) | |
| Race | 0.485 | ||
| White, non-Hispanic | 17 (100) | 15 (88) | |
| Black | 0 (0) | 2 (12) | |
| Jaundice as presenting symptom | 0.103 | ||
| Yes | 0 (0) | 4 (24) | |
| No | 17 (100) | 13 (76) | |
| Pre-operative serum CA 19-9 levels, mean (SD) (ng/mL) | 18.2 (19.1) | 185.5 (350.1) | 0.216 |
| Predominant tumor location | 0.084 | ||
| Pancreatic head | 6 (35) | 12 (71) | |
| Pancreatic body or tail | 11 (65) | 5 (29) | |
| Type of ductal communication | 0.005 | ||
| Main duct or mixed | 4 (24) | 13 (76) | |
| Branch duct | 13 (76) | 4 (24) | |
| Size of largest cyst, mean (SD) (cm) | 1.9 (1.1) | 3.4 (1.3) | 0.008 |
| Solid component or mural nodule | 0.141 | ||
| Yes | 3 (18) | 8 (47) | |
| No | 14 (82) | 9 (53) | |
| High risk stigmata | <0.001 | ||
| Yes | 3 (18) | 14 (82) | |
| No | 14 (82) | 3 (18) | |
| Worrisome features | 0.708 | ||
| Yes | 11 (65) | 13 (76) | |
| No | 6 (35) | 4 (24) | |
| BMI, mean (95% CI) (kg/m2) | 25.8 (4.9) | 28.9 (4.9) | 0.045 |
Quantitative radiologic measures of obesity, by IPMN pathology
| Parameter | Benign IPMNs ( | Malignant IPMNs ( | |
| Data represent mean values and standard deviation. | |||
| TAF area (cm2) | 321.8 (169.5) | 391.0 (201.3) | 0.259 |
| VFA (cm2) | 120.4 (68.4) | 199.3 (125.4) | 0.092 |
| SFA (cm2) | 201.3 (132.1) | 191.6 (191.6) | 0.734 |
| V/S (cm2) | 0.69 (0.5) | 1.25 (1.1) | 0.013 |
Gender-specific differences in BMI and quantitative radiologic measures of obesity, by IPMN pathology
| Parameter | Males (3 benign; 10 malignant) | Females (14 benign; 7 malignant) | ||
| Data represent mean values and standard deviation. | ||||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 24.0 (2.2); 29.0 (5.2) | 0.112 | 26.2 (5.3); 28.8 (4.8) | 0.224 |
| TAF area (cm2) | 209.9 (78.9); 408.9 (227.4) | 0.371 | 328.4 (184.7); 365.3 (171) | 0.689 |
| VFA (cm2) | 174.7 (80.7); 210.7 (131.5) | 1.000 | 108.8 (62.7); 183.2 (124.3) | 0.197 |
| SFA (cm2) | 116.3 (9.8); 198.3 (113.4) | 0.077 | 219.6 (139.5); 182.2 (95.7) | 0.743 |
| V/S (cm2) | 1.5 (0.8); 1.2 (0.5) | 0.287 | 0.5 (0.2); 1.4 (1.7) | 0.038 |
1Axial post contrast CTs (A and B) and quantitative segmentation (C and D) for two representative side BD IPMN cases with main pancreatic ducts normal in caliber. Case 1 has a well-demarcated homogenous hypodense 4.8 cm cystic lesion in the pancreatic neck (yellow arrow). The cystic lesion abuts the gastroduodenal artery (red arrow) without definite encasement. Case 2 has a poorly defined 1.3 cm hypoenhancing pancreatic neck lesion (yellow arrow). C and D: (1) Axial CT image through L2–L3 intervertebral disc level. (2) Axial CT subtracted image at superior endplate of L3. Abdominal wall and paraspinal muscle area were segmented and thresholds set to voxels with Hounsfield units (HU) –29 to 150. Visceral fat, intra-abdominal organs, and vasculature were subtracted. Although skeletal muscle indices can be obtained in a complementary manner to visceral fat measurements, these were not directly analyzed in this study. (3) Total abdominal fat with HU thresholds applied to include fat density voxels with HU –249 to –49 (green). (4) Manual segmentation of visceral fat regions (green).