Xiao-Li Chen1,2, Guang-Wen Chen3, Hong Pu3, Long-Lin Yin3, Zhen-Lin Li1, Bin Song1, Hang Li1,3. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. 2. 2 Department of Radiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital, Wuhou District, Chengdu, China. 3. 3 Department of Radiology, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences and Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, 32# Second Section of First Ring Rd, Qingyang District, Chengdu, 610072, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess whether MR volumetric data on DW and T2-weighted MR images are correlated with lymphovascular invasion and lymph node metastases in resectable rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study consisted of 50 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent radical surgery within 1 week of MRI. The gross tumor volume was determined on both diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted MR images and correlated with pathologic lymphovascular invasion and lymph node metastases using univariate, multivariate, and ROC curve analyses. RESULTS: Both gross tumor volume values showed correlations with lymphovascular invasion (r = 0.750 vs r = 0.710; p < 0.0001) and lymph node metastases (r = 0.780 vs r = 0.755; p < 0.0001). Both values were associated with lymphovascular invasion and lymph node metastases in univariate analysis (all p < 0.0001), whereas only the DWI-based value was an independent risk factor for lymphovascular invasion (odds ratio = 1.207; p = 0.005) and lymph node metastases (odds ratio = 1.420; p = 0.005) in multivariate analysis. Both values could distinguish between N0 and N1, N0 and N1-N2, and N0-N1 and N2 disease (all p < 0.0001) in the Mann-Whitney U test. The area under the ROC curve was higher for the DWI-based value in lymphovascular invasion (0.899 vs 0.877), N0 vs N1 (0.865 vs 0.827), N0 vs N1-N2 (0.934 vs 0.911), and N0-N1 vs N2 (0.932 vs 0.927). CONCLUSION: Tumor volumetry data correlated with both lymphovascular invasion and lymph node metastases in resectable rectal cancer. In particular, the DWI-based gross tumor volume showed the most potential for noninvasive preoperative evaluation of lymphovascular invasion and lymph node metastases.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess whether MR volumetric data on DW and T2-weighted MR images are correlated with lymphovascular invasion and lymph node metastases in resectable rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study consisted of 50 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent radical surgery within 1 week of MRI. The gross tumor volume was determined on both diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted MR images and correlated with pathologic lymphovascular invasion and lymph node metastases using univariate, multivariate, and ROC curve analyses. RESULTS: Both gross tumor volume values showed correlations with lymphovascular invasion (r = 0.750 vs r = 0.710; p < 0.0001) and lymph node metastases (r = 0.780 vs r = 0.755; p < 0.0001). Both values were associated with lymphovascular invasion and lymph node metastases in univariate analysis (all p < 0.0001), whereas only the DWI-based value was an independent risk factor for lymphovascular invasion (odds ratio = 1.207; p = 0.005) and lymph node metastases (odds ratio = 1.420; p = 0.005) in multivariate analysis. Both values could distinguish between N0 and N1, N0 and N1-N2, and N0-N1 and N2 disease (all p < 0.0001) in the Mann-Whitney U test. The area under the ROC curve was higher for the DWI-based value in lymphovascular invasion (0.899 vs 0.877), N0 vs N1 (0.865 vs 0.827), N0 vs N1-N2 (0.934 vs 0.911), and N0-N1 vs N2 (0.932 vs 0.927). CONCLUSION:Tumor volumetry data correlated with both lymphovascular invasion and lymph node metastases in resectable rectal cancer. In particular, the DWI-based gross tumor volume showed the most potential for noninvasive preoperative evaluation of lymphovascular invasion and lymph node metastases.
Authors: Jaromir Kargol; Wojciech Rudnicki; Jakub Kenig; Justyna Filipowska; Ewa Kaznowska; Tomasz Kluz; Wiesław Guz; Elżbieta Łuczyńska Journal: Med Sci Monit Date: 2021-12-06