Alexey Surov1, Maciej Pech1, Maciej Powerski1, Katja Woidacki2, Andreas Wienke3. 1. Clinic for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Otto-von-Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany. 2. Experimental Radiology, Clinic for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Otto-von-Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany. 3. Institute of Medical Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Informatics, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.
Abstract
AIM: Our purpose was to perform a systemic literature review and meta-analysis regarding use of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for prediction of histopathological features in rectal cancer (RC) and to prove if ADC can predict treatment response to neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (NARC) in RC. METHODS: MEDLINE library, EMBASE, Cochrane, and SCOPUS database were screened for associations between ADC and histopathology and/or treatment response in RC up to June 2020. Authors, year of publication, study design, number of patients, mean value, and standard deviation of ADC were acquired. The methodological quality of the collected studies was checked according to the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Studies instrument. The meta-analysis was undertaken by using the RevMan 5.3 software. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models with inverse-variance weights were used to account the heterogeneity between the studies. Mean ADC values including 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 37 items (2,015 patients) were included. ADC values of tumors with different T and N stages and grades overlapped strongly. ADC cannot distinguish RC with a high- and low-carcinoembryonic antigen level. Regarding KRAS status, ADC cannot discriminate mutated and wild-type RC. ADC did not correlate significantly with expression of vascular endothelial growth factor and hypoxia-inducible factor 1a. ADC correlates with Ki 67, with the calculated correlation coefficient: -0.52. The ADC values in responders and nonresponders overlapped significantly. CONCLUSION: ADC correlates moderately with expression of Ki 67 in RC. ADC cannot discriminate tumor stages, grades, and KRAS status in RC. ADC cannot predict therapy response to NARC in RC.
AIM: Our purpose was to perform a systemic literature review and meta-analysis regarding use of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for prediction of histopathological features in rectal cancer (RC) and to prove if ADC can predict treatment response to neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (NARC) in RC. METHODS: MEDLINE library, EMBASE, Cochrane, and SCOPUS database were screened for associations between ADC and histopathology and/or treatment response in RC up to June 2020. Authors, year of publication, study design, number of patients, mean value, and standard deviation of ADC were acquired. The methodological quality of the collected studies was checked according to the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Studies instrument. The meta-analysis was undertaken by using the RevMan 5.3 software. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models with inverse-variance weights were used to account the heterogeneity between the studies. Mean ADC values including 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 37 items (2,015 patients) were included. ADC values of tumors with different T and N stages and grades overlapped strongly. ADC cannot distinguish RC with a high- and low-carcinoembryonic antigen level. Regarding KRAS status, ADC cannot discriminate mutated and wild-type RC. ADC did not correlate significantly with expression of vascular endothelial growth factor and hypoxia-inducible factor 1a. ADC correlates with Ki 67, with the calculated correlation coefficient: -0.52. The ADC values in responders and nonresponders overlapped significantly. CONCLUSION: ADC correlates moderately with expression of Ki 67 in RC. ADC cannot discriminate tumor stages, grades, and KRAS status in RC. ADC cannot predict therapy response to NARC in RC.
Authors: Eun Mi Lee; Yong Sang Hong; Kyu-Pyo Kim; Jae-Lyun Lee; Sun Young Kim; Young Suk Park; Doo Ho Choi; Jong Hoon Kim; Seok-Byung Lim; Chang Sik Yu; Jin Cheon Kim; Ju Hee Lee; Ah Young Kim; Tae Won Kim Journal: Cancer Sci Date: 2012-11-26 Impact factor: 6.716
Authors: Roberto Fornell-Perez; Valentina Vivas-Escalona; Joel Aranda-Sanchez; M Carmen Gonzalez-Dominguez; Jano Rubio-Garcia; Patricia Aleman-Flores; Alvaro Lozano-Rodriguez; Gabriela Porcel-de-Peralta; Juan Francisco Loro-Ferrer Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2020-02-04 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Penny Whiting; Anne W S Rutjes; Johannes B Reitsma; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Jos Kleijnen Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2003-11-10 Impact factor: 4.615