4.1 Article

Staging of pancreatic cancer with multidetector CT in the setting of preoperative chemoradiation therapy

Journal

ABDOMINAL IMAGING
Volume 31, Issue 5, Pages 568-574

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00261-005-0194-y

Keywords

computed tomography, multidetector row; pancreas, neoplasms, staging; preoperative therapy; chemotherapy; radiation therapy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Preoperative chemoradiation can potentially improve outcomes in patients with pancreatic cancer. This study addresses its effect on staging pancreatic cancer with multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). Methods: Fifty-five patients underwent a dual-phase MDCT pancreas protocol for proved pancreatic cancer. Of these, 16 patients underwent preoperative chemoradiation. Three radiologists independently reviewed images to assess for locally advanced disease, liver and peritoneal metastases on baseline studies of all 55 patients, and on follow-up preoperative studies for the 16 patients receiving preoperative therapy. Overall score for resectability was graded on a scale from 1 to 5 (1, definitely resectable; 5. definitely unresectable). Receiver operating characteristic curves and weighted (kappa statistics were determined. Results: The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for readers 1, 2, and 3 were 0.98, 0.96, and 0.90, respectively. Weighted kappa values for reader 1 versus reader 2, reader 1 versus reader 3, and reader 2 versus reader 3 were 0.90, 0.57, and 0.54, respectively. Interpreting scores of 1 to 3 for resectability as resectable disease, the mean values for sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and accuracy were 0.92, 0.91, 0.74, 0.98, and 0.92 respectively. Conclusion: The negative predictive value for MDCT for identifying unresectable pancreatic cancer in the setting of preoperative therapy is comparable to that reported in the absence of neoadjuvant therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available