| Literature DB >> 29134349 |
Davide Prezzi1,2,3, Ramin Mandegaran4, Sofia Gourtsoyianni5,4, Katarzyna Owczarczyk5,6, Andrew Gaya6, Robert Glynne-Jones7, Vicky Goh5,4,7.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare maximum tumour diameter (MTD) and gross tumour volume (GTV) measurements between T2-weighted (T2-w) and diffusion-weighted (DWI) MRI in squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal (SCCA) and assess sequence impact on tumour (T) staging. Second, to evaluate interobserver agreement and reader delineation confidence.Entities:
Keywords: Anus neoplasms; Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging; Magnetic resonance imaging; Neoplasm staging; Radiotherapy, image-guided
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29134349 PMCID: PMC5834548 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-5133-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol ISSN: 0938-7994 Impact factor: 5.315
SCCA primary tumour (T) staging criteria according to the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 7th edition [16]
| TX | Primary tumour cannot be assessed |
| T0 | No evidence of primary tumour |
| Tis | Carcinoma in situ |
| T1 | Tumour ≤2 cm in greatest dimension |
| T2 | Tumour >2 cm and ≤5 cm in greatest dimension |
| T3 | Tumour >5 cm in greatest dimension |
| T4 | Tumour of any size invading adjacent organs |
Fig. 1Anorectal SCCA. High-resolution T2-w axial-oblique image at the level of the anorectal junction (top left): lesion contouring is challenging considering the suboptimal contrast resolution between tumour and adjacent mucosa. Same-level high b-value axial DWI (top right): the hyperintense lesion can be clearly outlined against the suppressed signal of surrounding healthy tissue. T2-w sagittal image used for MTD measurement (bottom left). Corresponding sagittal reformat of high b-value DWI, also used for MTD measurement (bottom right)
Reader-specific MTD and GTV measurements (mean, standard deviation and range), paired samples t-test P values and Pearson correlation test r and P values
| Observer 1 (inexperienced) | Observer 2 (experienced) | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MTD (cm) | GTV (cm3) | MTD (cm) | GTV (cm3) | |||||||||
| Mean | SD | Range | Mean | SD | Range | Mean | SD | Range | Mean | SD | Range | |
| T2-w | 5.88 | 2.14 | 1.36–10.93 | 24.95 | 23.67 | 0.89–110.84 | 5.41 | 2.07 | 1.46–9.58 | 20.98 | 20.94 | 0.70–95.04 |
| DWI | 5.01 | 1.99 | 1.16–9.38 | 17.54 | 18.30 | 0.16–79.99 | 4.87 | 2.24 | 0.79–10.83 | 18.41 | 20.10 | 0.13–95.15 |
| Relative change | −14.80% | −29.70% | −9.98% | −12.25% | ||||||||
| t-test | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||||||||
| Correlation r | 0.875 | 0.949 | 0.906 | 0.987 | ||||||||
| Correlation | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||||||||
Fig. 2Mean MTD (cm) and GTV (cm3) measurements on T2-w versus DWI sequences, visualised case by case. Both measurements were systematically lower on DWI than on T2-w
Fig. 3Tumour (T) staging based on MTD measurements on T2-w versus DWI. Sequence selection affects T staging, particularly when the reader is inexperienced (Observer 1)
Fig. 4Interobserver agreement. Bland-Altman plots for MTD and GTV on T2-w versus DWI sequences: relative interobserver differences (mean difference and 95% limits of agreement) are plotted against the mean value
Intraclass correlation coefficients (95% confidence intervals)
| MTD | GTV | |
|---|---|---|
| T2-w | 0.899 (0.803–0.946) | 0.968 (0.915–0.985) |
| DWI | 0.925 (0.863–0.959) | 0.990 (0.918–0.994) |
Fig. 5Confidence scores. Both the inexperienced (Observer 1) and the experienced reader (Observer 2) outlined tumours confidently (scores of 4 to 5) more frequently on DWI than on T2-w. The confidence gain with DWI is greater for the inexperienced observer