Literature DB >> 9423627

Prediction of tumor control in patients with cervical cancer: analysis of combined volume and dynamic enhancement pattern by MR imaging.

N A Mayr1, W T Yuh, J Zheng, J C Ehrhardt, V A Magnotta, J I Sorosky, R E Pelsang, L W Oberley, D H Hussey.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Quantitative analysis of either tumor volume or dynamic enhancement pattern using MR imaging has been reported as useful in the prediction of response to radiation therapy in cancer of the cervix. Because data for both analyses can be obtained in a single MR examination, the purpose of this study was to evaluate whether combining both analyses can further improve the efficacy of using MR imaging to predict tumor control after radiation therapy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients with bulky carcinomas of the cervix, stages bulky IB (n = 2), IIB (n = 6), IIIA (n = 1), IIIB (n = 9), IVA (n = 1), and recurrent (n = 1), were studied. Initial tumor volumes were calculated by outlining the area of tumor in each slice on T2-weighted images and multiplying by the slice profile. Two dynamic contrast-enhanced MR studies were obtained in each patient immediately before the start of radiation therapy and after 20-22 Gy in 2 weeks of radiation therapy. Dynamic enhancement imaging was performed at 3-sec intervals in the sagittal plane for 120 sec after rapid (9 ml/sec) i.v. injection of MR contrast agent (0.1 mmol/kg of gadoteridol) using a power injector. Time and signal intensity curves reflecting the relative signal intensity of contrast enhancement in the tumor region were generated, and the relative signal intensity of the tumor region during the early plateau phase was calculated. Median follow-up was 25 months (range, 11-35 months).
RESULTS: The combined analysis did not improve the prediction rate of local recurrence in small-sized tumors, which responded well to radiation therapy regardless of their dynamic enhancement pattern. However, the combined analysis did improve the prediction rate of local recurrence in intermediate- and large-sized tumors (75% and 80%, respectively) over assessment by either volume analysis (33% and 60%, respectively) or dynamic enhancement pattern analysis (64% and 64%, respectively). The combined analysis was most useful in intermediate-sized tumors (40-99 cm3; 33% recurrence), significantly improving differentiation between high-risk (80% recurrence) and low-risk 10% recurrence) patients (p = .010).
CONCLUSION: Our preliminary results suggest that the combined data of both tumor morphologic (volume) and microcirculatory (dynamic enhancement pattern) parameters allow more accurate prediction of local failure in patients with advanced cervical cancer than does each individual parameter alone. Combined data appear to have the greatest potential in patients with intermediate-sized tumors, who constitute most patients (60%) and remain a challenge for outcome prediction and management.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9423627     DOI: 10.2214/ajr.170.1.9423627

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  13 in total

1.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis. Better techniques can help determine management and predict outcome.

Authors:  J A Spencer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-05-27

Review 2.  Applications of magnetic resonance in model systems: cancer therapeutics.

Authors:  J L Evelhoch; R J Gillies; G S Karczmar; J A Koutcher; R J Maxwell; O Nalcioglu; N Raghunand; S M Ronen; B D Ross; H M Swartz
Journal:  Neoplasia       Date:  2000 Jan-Apr       Impact factor: 5.715

Review 3.  Causes and effects of heterogeneous perfusion in tumors.

Authors:  R J Gillies; P A Schornack; T W Secomb; N Raghunand
Journal:  Neoplasia       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 5.715

4.  Which is the best advanced MR imaging protocol for predicting recurrent metastatic brain tumor following gamma-knife radiosurgery: focused on perfusion method.

Authors:  Myeong Ju Koh; Ho Sung Kim; Choong Gon Choi; Sang Joon Kim
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2015-01-16       Impact factor: 2.804

5.  Abnormalities in the recirculation phase of contrast agent bolus passage in cerebral gliomas: comparison with relative blood volume and tumor grade.

Authors:  Alan Jackson; Andrea Kassner; Deborah Annesley-Williams; Helen Reid; Xiau-Ping Zhu; Kah-Loh Li
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 3.825

6.  MRI Conditional Actively Tracked Metallic Electrophysiology Catheters and Guidewires With Miniature Tethered Radio-Frequency Traps: Theory, Design, and Validation.

Authors:  Akbar Alipour; Eric S Meyer; Charles L Dumoulin; Ronald D Watkins; Hassan Elahi; Wolfgang Loew; Jeffrey Schweitzer; Gregory Olson; Yue Chen; Susumu Tao; Michael Guttman; Aravindan Kolandaivelu; Henry R Halperin; Ehud J Schmidt
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 4.538

7.  The value of perfusion CT in predicting the short-term response to synchronous radiochemotherapy for cervical squamous cancer.

Authors:  Xiang Sheng Li; Hong Xia Fan; Hong Xian Zhu; Yun Long Song; Chun Wu Zhou
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Predicting control of primary tumor and survival by DCE MRI during early therapy in cervical cancer.

Authors:  William T C Yuh; Nina A Mayr; David Jarjoura; Dee Wu; John C Grecula; Simon S Lo; Susan M Edwards; Vincent A Magnotta; Steffen Sammet; Hualin Zhang; Joseph F Montebello; Jeffrey Fowler; Michael V Knopp; Jian Z Wang
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 6.016

9.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the liver: New imaging strategies for evaluating focal liver lesions.

Authors:  Kenneth Coenegrachts
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2009-12-31

10.  Apparent diffusion coefficient in cervical cancer of the uterus: comparison with the normal uterine cervix.

Authors:  Shinji Naganawa; Chiho Sato; Hisashi Kumada; Takeo Ishigaki; Shunichi Miura; Osamu Takizawa
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-11-05       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.