Inês Santiago1,2, Maria Barata3, Nuno Figueiredo4, Oriol Parés5, Vanessa Henriques6, António Galzerano6, Carlos Carvalho7, Celso Matos3, Richard J Heald4. 1. Radiology Department, Champalimaud Foundation, Avenida Brasília, 1400-038, Lisbon, Portugal. ines.santiago@neuro.fchampalimaud.org. 2. Nova Medical School, Campo Mártires da Pátria 130, 1169-056, Lisbon, Portugal. ines.santiago@neuro.fchampalimaud.org. 3. Radiology Department, Champalimaud Foundation, Avenida Brasília, 1400-038, Lisbon, Portugal. 4. Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Unit, Champalimaud Foundation, Avenida Brasília, 1400-038, Lisbon, Portugal. 5. Radiation Oncology Department, Champalimaud Foundation, Avenida Brasília, 1400-038, Lisbon, Portugal. 6. Pathology Department, Champalimaud Foundation, Avenida Brasília, 1400-038, Lisbon, Portugal. 7. Medical Oncology, Digestive Unit, Champalimaud Foundation, Avenida Brasília, 1400-038, Lisbon, Portugal.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To measure the diagnostic performance of a new radiologic pattern on restaging magnetic resonance (MR) high-resolution T2-weighted imaging (T2-WI)-the split scar sign-for the identification of sustained complete response (SCR) after neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer. METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained for this retrospective study and the informed consent requirement was waived. Fifty-eight consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant therapy were enrolled. Two radiologists blindly and independently reviewed restaging pelvic MR imaging and recorded the presence/absence of the split scar sign (mrSSS). On a second round, they also assessed the relative proportion of intermediate signal intensity on T2-WI (mrT2) and of high signal intensity on high b-value diffusion-weighted imaging (mrDWI). Endoscopic response grading records were retrieved. Qui-square test was employed in search for associations between SCR, defined as pathologic complete response or long-term recurrence-free clinical follow-up, and mrSSS, mrT2, mrDWI and endoscopy. Interobserver agreement for imaging parameters was estimated using Cohen's kappa (k). RESULTS: mrSSS was significantly associated with SCR, with specificity = 0.97/0.97, sensitivity = 0.52/0.64, PPV = 0.93/0.94, NPV = 0.73/0.78, and AuROC = 0.78/0.83, for observers 1/2, respectively. mrDWI was significantly associated with SCR for observer 2, with specificity = 0.76, sensitivity = 0.60, PPV = 0.65, NPV = 0.71, and AuROC = 0.69. mrT2 and endoscopy were not discriminative. Interobserver agreement was substantial for mrSSS (k = 0.69), moderate for mrDWI (k = 0.46), and poor for mrT2 (k = 0.17). CONCLUSION: The split scar sign is a simple morphologic pattern visible on restaging T2-WI which, although not sensitive, is very specific for the identification of sustained complete responders after neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer. KEY POINTS: • The split scar sign is a morphologic pattern visible on high-resolution T2-weighted MR imaging in rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant therapy. It therefore does not require any changes to standard protocol. • At first restaging pelvic MR imaging (mean: 9.1 weeks after the end of radiotherapy), the split scar sign identified patients who sustained a complete response with very high specificity (0.97) and positive predictive value (0.93-0.94). • The split scar sign has the potential to improve patient selection for "watch-and-wait" after neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer.
OBJECTIVES: To measure the diagnostic performance of a new radiologic pattern on restaging magnetic resonance (MR) high-resolution T2-weighted imaging (T2-WI)-the split scar sign-for the identification of sustained complete response (SCR) after neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer. METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained for this retrospective study and the informed consent requirement was waived. Fifty-eight consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant therapy were enrolled. Two radiologists blindly and independently reviewed restaging pelvic MR imaging and recorded the presence/absence of the split scar sign (mrSSS). On a second round, they also assessed the relative proportion of intermediate signal intensity on T2-WI (mrT2) and of high signal intensity on high b-value diffusion-weighted imaging (mrDWI). Endoscopic response grading records were retrieved. Qui-square test was employed in search for associations between SCR, defined as pathologic complete response or long-term recurrence-free clinical follow-up, and mrSSS, mrT2, mrDWI and endoscopy. Interobserver agreement for imaging parameters was estimated using Cohen's kappa (k). RESULTS: mrSSS was significantly associated with SCR, with specificity = 0.97/0.97, sensitivity = 0.52/0.64, PPV = 0.93/0.94, NPV = 0.73/0.78, and AuROC = 0.78/0.83, for observers 1/2, respectively. mrDWI was significantly associated with SCR for observer 2, with specificity = 0.76, sensitivity = 0.60, PPV = 0.65, NPV = 0.71, and AuROC = 0.69. mrT2 and endoscopy were not discriminative. Interobserver agreement was substantial for mrSSS (k = 0.69), moderate for mrDWI (k = 0.46), and poor for mrT2 (k = 0.17). CONCLUSION: The split scar sign is a simple morphologic pattern visible on restaging T2-WI which, although not sensitive, is very specific for the identification of sustained complete responders after neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer. KEY POINTS: • The split scar sign is a morphologic pattern visible on high-resolution T2-weighted MR imaging in rectal cancerpatients after neoadjuvant therapy. It therefore does not require any changes to standard protocol. • At first restaging pelvic MR imaging (mean: 9.1 weeks after the end of radiotherapy), the split scar sign identified patients who sustained a complete response with very high specificity (0.97) and positive predictive value (0.93-0.94). • The split scar sign has the potential to improve patient selection for "watch-and-wait" after neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
Magnetic resonance imaging; Neoadjuvant therapy; Rectal neoplasms; Watchful waiting
Authors: Doenja M J Lambregts; Miriam M van Heeswijk; Andrea Delli Pizzi; Saskia G C van Elderen; Luisa Andrade; Nicky H G M Peters; Peter A M Kint; Margreet Osinga-de Jong; Shandra Bipat; Rik Ooms; Max J Lahaye; Monique Maas; Geerard L Beets; Frans C H Bakers; Regina G H Beets-Tan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-04-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Doenja M J Lambregts; Andrea Delli Pizzi; Max J Lahaye; Joost J M van Griethuysen; Monique Maas; Geerard L Beets; Frans C H Bakers; Regina G H Beets-Tan Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Maxime J M van der Valk; Denise E Hilling; Esther Bastiaannet; Elma Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg; Geerard L Beets; Nuno L Figueiredo; Angelita Habr-Gama; Rodrigo O Perez; Andrew G Renehan; Cornelis J H van de Velde Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-06-23 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Alexander K P Chan; Alfred Wong; Daryl Jenken; John Heine; Donald Buie; Douglas Johnson Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Monique Maas; Patty J Nelemans; Vincenzo Valentini; Prajnan Das; Claus Rödel; Li-Jen Kuo; Felipe A Calvo; Julio García-Aguilar; Rob Glynne-Jones; Karin Haustermans; Mohammed Mohiuddin; Salvatore Pucciarelli; William Small; Javier Suárez; George Theodoropoulos; Sebastiano Biondo; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Geerard L Beets Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2010-08-06 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Seth I Felder; Sebastian Feuerlein; Arthur Parsee; Iman Imanirad; Julian Sanchez; Sophie Dessureault; Richard Kim; Sarah Hoffe; Jessica Frakes; James Costello Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2020-10-28
Authors: Seong Ho Park; Seung Hyun Cho; Sang Hyun Choi; Jong Keon Jang; Min Ju Kim; Seung Ho Kim; Joon Seok Lim; Sung Kyoung Moon; Ji Hoon Park; Nieun Seo Journal: Korean J Radiol Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 3.500
Authors: Andrea Delli Pizzi; Antonio Maria Chiarelli; Piero Chiacchiaretta; Martina d'Annibale; Pierpaolo Croce; Consuelo Rosa; Domenico Mastrodicasa; Stefano Trebeschi; Doenja Marina Johanna Lambregts; Daniele Caposiena; Francesco Lorenzo Serafini; Raffaella Basilico; Giulio Cocco; Pierluigi Di Sebastiano; Sebastiano Cinalli; Antonio Ferretti; Richard Geoffrey Wise; Domenico Genovesi; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Massimo Caulo Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-03-08 Impact factor: 4.996