Prognostic aspects of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in synchronous distant metastatic rectal cancer
- 294 Downloads
To explore the correlations between DCE-MRI quantitative parameters and synchronous distant metastasis and the clinicopathological factors in rectal cancers.
Sixty-three patients with rectal cancer (synchronous distant metastasis, n = 31; non-metastasis, n = 32) were enrolled in this study. Student’s t test and ANOVA were used to compare DCE-MRI parameters (K trans , K ep and V e ). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to find the reasonable threshold of DCE-MRI parameters to differentiate lesions with synchronous distant metastasis from those without metastasis.
The K trans , K ep , and V e value were significantly higher in the lesions with distant metastasis than in the lesions without distant metastasis (0.536 ± 0.242 vs. 0.299 ± 0.118 min-1, p < 0.001; 1.598 ± 0.477 vs. 1.341 ± 0.390 min-1, p = 0.022; and 0.324 ± 0.173 vs. 0.249 ± 0.091, p = 0.034; respectively). The K trans showed the highest AUCs of 0.788 (p < 0.001), with sensitivity of 61.29 % and specificity of 87.5 %, respectively.
DCE-MRI parameters may represent a prognostic indicator for synchronous distant metastases in patients with rectal cancer.
• The K trans , K ep and V e values correlated with synchronous distant metastasis.
• Higher K trans , K ep and V e values were noted among patients with metastasis.
• DCE-MRI parameters might represent a prognostic indicator for synchronous distant metastases.
KeywordsDCE-MRI Rectal cancer Synchronous distant metastasis Quantitative parameters Clinicopathological factors
Area under the curve
Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging
Rate constant from EES to blood plasma (min-1)
Volume transfer constant between EES and blood plasma (min-1)
Receiver operating characteristic
EES volume per unit tissue volume
The scientific guarantor of this publication is Hai-Bin Shi. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board. Methodology: retrospective, observational, performed at one institution.
- 1.Engelen SM, Maas M, Lahaye MJ, Leijtens JW, van Berlo CL, Jansen RL et al (2013) Modern multidisciplinary treatment of rectal cancer based on staging with magnetic resonance imaging leads to excellent local control, but distant control remains a challenge. Eur J Cancer 49:2311–2320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.Wang L, Zhong XG, Peng YF, Li ZW, Gu J (2014) Prognostic value of pretreatment level of carcinoembryonic antigen on tumour downstaging and early occurring metastasis in locally advanced rectal cancer following neoadjuvant radiotherapy (30 Gy in 10 fractions). Colorectal Dis 16:33–39CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 32.Scharitzer M, Ba-Ssalamah A, Ringl H, Kolblinger C, Grunberger T, Weber M et al (2013) Preoperative evaluation of colorectal liver metastases: comparison between gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0-T MRI and contrast-enhanced MDCT with histopathological correlation. Eur Radiol 23:2187–2196CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar