Shan Hu1,2, Yang Peng3, Qiushi Wang1, Bin Liu1, Ihab Kamel4, Zaiyi Liu1, Changhong Liang5,6. 1. The Second School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China. 2. Department of Radiology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, 510080, Guangdong, China. 3. Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1095 Jiefang Avenue, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, People's Republic of China. 4. Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. 5. The Second School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China. liangchanghong@gdph.org.cn. 6. Department of Radiology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, 510080, Guangdong, China. liangchanghong@gdph.org.cn.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Histopathologic prognostic factors of rectal cancer are closely associated with local recurrence and distant metastasis. We aim to investigate the feasibility of T2*WI in assessment of clinical prognostic factors of rectal cancer, and compare with DKI. METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled 50 out of 205 patients with rectal cancer according to the inclusion criteria. The following parameters were obtained: R2* from T2*WI, mean diffusivity (MDk), mean kurtosis (MK), and mean diffusivity (MDt) from DKI using tensor method. Above parameters were compared by Mann-Whitney U-test or students' t test. Spearman correlations between different parameters and histopathological prognostic factors were determined. The diagnostic performances of R2* and DKI-derived parameters were analyzed by receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC), separately and jointly. RESULTS: There were positive correlations between R2* and multiple prognostic factors of rectal cancer such as T category, N category, tumor grade, CEA level, and LVI (P < 0.004). MDk and MDt showed negative correlations with almost all the histopathological prognostic factors except CRM and TIL involvement (P < 0.003). MK correlated positively with the prognostic factors except CA19-9 level and CRM involvement (P < 0.006). The AUC ranges were 0.724-0.950 for R2* and 0.755-0.913 for DKI-derived parameters for differentiation of prognostic factors. However, no significant differences of diagnostic performance were found between T2*WI, DKI, or the combined imaging methods in characterizing rectal cancer. CONCLUSION: R2* and DKI-derived parameters were associated with different histopathological prognostic factors, and might act as noninvasive biomarkers for histopathological characterization of rectal cancer.
PURPOSE: Histopathologic prognostic factors of rectal cancer are closely associated with local recurrence and distant metastasis. We aim to investigate the feasibility of T2*WI in assessment of clinical prognostic factors of rectal cancer, and compare with DKI. METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled 50 out of 205 patients with rectal cancer according to the inclusion criteria. The following parameters were obtained: R2* from T2*WI, mean diffusivity (MDk), mean kurtosis (MK), and mean diffusivity (MDt) from DKI using tensor method. Above parameters were compared by Mann-Whitney U-test or students' t test. Spearman correlations between different parameters and histopathological prognostic factors were determined. The diagnostic performances of R2* and DKI-derived parameters were analyzed by receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC), separately and jointly. RESULTS: There were positive correlations between R2* and multiple prognostic factors of rectal cancer such as T category, N category, tumor grade, CEA level, and LVI (P < 0.004). MDk and MDt showed negative correlations with almost all the histopathological prognostic factors except CRM and TIL involvement (P < 0.003). MK correlated positively with the prognostic factors except CA19-9 level and CRM involvement (P < 0.006). The AUC ranges were 0.724-0.950 for R2* and 0.755-0.913 for DKI-derived parameters for differentiation of prognostic factors. However, no significant differences of diagnostic performance were found between T2*WI, DKI, or the combined imaging methods in characterizing rectal cancer. CONCLUSION: R2* and DKI-derived parameters were associated with different histopathological prognostic factors, and might act as noninvasive biomarkers for histopathological characterization of rectal cancer.
Authors: Jürgen Weitz; Moritz Koch; Jürgen Debus; Thomas Höhler; Peter R Galle; Markus W Büchler Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 Jan 8-14 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Vincenza Granata; Roberta Fusco; Alfonso Reginelli; Paolo Delrio; Francesco Selvaggi; Roberto Grassi; Francesco Izzo; Antonella Petrillo Journal: J Int Med Res Date: 2019-04-28 Impact factor: 1.671
Authors: T Bostel; C Dreher; D Wollschläger; A Mayer; F König; S Bickelhaupt; H P Schlemmer; P E Huber; F Sterzing; P Bäumer; J Debus; N H Nicolay Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2020-07-11 Impact factor: 3.481