| Literature DB >> 29383117 |
Marco Rengo1, Simona Picchia1, Simona Marzi2, Davide Bellini1, Damiano Caruso1, Mauro Caterino3, Maria Ciolina1, Domenico De Santis1, Daniela Musio4, Vincenzo Tombolini4, Andrea Laghi1.
Abstract
This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of a magnetic resonance (MR) automatic method for quantitative assessment of the percentage of fibrosis developed within locally advanced rectal cancers (LARC) after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT). A total of 65 patients were enrolled in the study and MR studies were performed on 3.0 Tesla scanner; patients were followed-up for 30 months. The percentage of fibrosis was quantified on T2-weighted images, using automatic K-Means clustering algorithm. According to the percentage of fibrosis, an optimal cut-off point for separating patients into favorable and unfavorable pathologic response groups was identified by ROC analysis and tumor regression grade (MR-TRG) classes were determined and compared to histopathologic TRG. An optimal cut-off point of 81% of fibrosis was identified to differentiate between favorable and unfavorable pathologic response groups resulting in a sensitivity of 78.26% and a specificity of 97.62% for the identification of complete responders (CRs). Interobserver agreement was good (0.85). The agreement between P-TRG and MR-TRG was excellent (0.923). Significant differences in terms of overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) were found between favorable and unfavorable pathologic response groups. The automatic quantification of fibrosis determined by MR is feasible and reproducible.Entities:
Keywords: magnetic resonance imaging; neoadjuvant therapy; prognosis; rectal cancer
Year: 2017 PMID: 29383117 PMCID: PMC5777729 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.21778
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Figure 1Study population
Flow chart detailing the patient selection process.
Baseline characteristics of patient’s population
| 0.65 | ||||
| | 44(66.7%) | 14 (60.9%) | 29 (69.1%) | |
| | 21 (33.3%) | 9 (39.1%) | 13 (30.9%) | |
| 64.8 (±8.43) | 62.5 (±6.7) | 65.3 (±9.2) | ||
| 0.78 | ||||
| | 1 (1.5%) | 1 (4.3%) | 1 (2.3%) | |
| | 56 (86.2%) | 19 (82.6%) | 36 (85.7%) | |
| | 8 (12.3%) | 3 (13.1%) | 5 (12%) | |
| 0.15 | ||||
| | 12 (18.4%) | 5 (21.7%) | 8 (19.1%) | |
| | 26 (40%) | 6 (26.1%) | 18 (42.8%) | |
| | 27 (41.6%) | 12 (52.2%) | 16 (38.1%) | |
| 0.26 | ||||
| | 12 (18.4%) | 5 (21.7%) | 8 (19.1%) | |
| | 1 (1.5%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (2.3%) | |
| | 27 (41.6%) | 7 (30.4%) | 19 (45.3%) | |
| | 25 (38.5%) | 11 (47.9%) | 14 (33.3%) | |
| 0.23 | ||||
| | 43 (66.2%) | 18 (78.3%) | 26 (61.9%) | |
| | 22 (33.8%) | 5 (21.7%) | 16 (38.1%) | |
| 0.32 | ||||
| | 37 (56.9%) | 14 (60.9%) | 23 (54.7%) | |
| | 15 (23.1%) | 2 (8.7%) | 11 (26.2%) | |
| | 13 (20%) | 7 (30.4%) | 8 (19.1%) |
Accuracy for the detection of CRs
| AUC | 0.947 | 0.861 to 0.987 | <0.0001 |
| sensitivity | 78.26 | 56.3 – 92.5 | |
| specificity | 97.62 | 87.4 – 99.9 | |
| PPV* | 94.7 | 74.0 – 99.9 | |
| NPV** | 89.1 | 76.2 – 96.4 |
* Positive predictive value; ** negative predictive value.
Figure 2ROC curves
The figure shows the Area Under the Curve (AUC) of the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve Analysis with 95% Confidence Limits (AUC = 0.947 and CI: 0.861 - 0.987).
Figure 3Kaplan Meier curves
Kaplan-Meier curves of DFS (a) and OS (b) for unfavorable and favorable group.
Exclusion criteria
| Evidence of contraindications to MR examination (e.g. pacemaker, cochlear implant, etc.). |
| Incomplete MR acquisition or histopathological analysis. |
| Contraindication to the use of neoadjuvant therapy or surgical treatment. |
| Suspension of neoadjuvant combination chemotherapy-radiation treatment prior to surgery, presence of synchronous tumors, mucinous histotype, neurological or psychiatric disorders or previous pelvic radiotherapy. |
| Hypersensitivity to the study drug or to one of the excipients. |
| Legal incapacity. |
| Concurrent treatment with experimental drugs or participation in another clinical trial with any investigational drug within 30 days before study screening. |
| Alcohol or drug abuse. |
MR protocol
| Sequence | Planes | TR/TE (msec) | NEX | Matrix | Slice thickness (mm) | Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| orthogonal and parallel to the long axis of the tumor | 4172 / 122.3 | 2 | 512×512 | 4 | ||
| Axial | 4400 / 81.4 | 256×256 | 4 | B values: 0, 10, 20, 30, 50, 60, 100, 200, 600, 800 and 1000 sec/mm2 | ||
| Axial | 13.6 / 3.3 | 2 | 512×512 | 4 | FA: 15° | |
| Axial | 13.6 / 3.3 | 2 | 512×512 | 4 | IV administration of 2ml/kg of body weight of gadolinium chelate followed by a 15 ml saline flush at a rate of 2 ml/s. |
* Fast Relaxation Fast Spin Echo; ** Single-Shot Echo Planar Imaging; *** Fast Spoiled Gradient-Echo.
Figure 4Quantification of fibrosis percentage
This example shows the native T2w images and the corresponding one elaborated with our software. The gray pixels represent the low signal intensity (fibrosis) and the white ones the high signal intensity (residual tumor). The histogram shows the distribution of pixels on the basis of their signal intensity.