4.4 Article

MRI volumetry for prediction of tumour response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY
卷 88, 期 1051, 页码 -

出版社

BRITISH INST RADIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20150097

关键词

-

资金

  1. South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority [2012002]
  2. Norwegian Cancer Society [D04085/003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To investigate if MRI-assessed tumour volumetry correlates with histological tumour response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and subsequent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Methods: Data from 69 prospectively enrolled patients with LARC receiving NACT followed by CRT and radical surgery were analysed. Whole-tumour volumes were contoured in T-2 weighted MR images obtained pretreatment (V-PRE), after NACT (V-NACT) and after the full course of NACT followed by CRT (V-CRT). V-PRE, V-NACT and tumour volume changes relative to V-PRE, Delta V-NACT and Delta V-CRT were calculated and correlated to histological tumour regression grade (TRG). Results: 61% of good histological responders (TRG 1-2) to NACT followed by CRT were correctly predicted by combining V-PRE < 10.5cm(3), Delta V-NACT > -78.2% and V-NACT< 3.3cm(3). The highest accuracy was found for V-NACT, with 55.1% sensitivity given 100% specificity. The volume regression after completed NACT and CRT (V-CRT) was not significantly different between good and poor responders (TRG 1-2 vs TRG 3-5). Conclusion: MRI-assessed small tumour volumes after NACT correlated with good histological tumour response (TRG 1-2) to the completed course of NACT and CRT. Furthermore, by combining tumour volume measurements before, during and after NACT, more good responders were identified. Advances in knowledge: MRI volumetry may be a tool for early identification of good and poor responders to NACT followed by CRT and surgery in LARC in order to aid more individualized, multimodal treatment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据