4.7 Article

Diffusion-weighted MRI in rectal cancer: Apparent diffusion coefficient as a potential noninvasive marker of tumor aggressiveness

期刊

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
卷 35, 期 6, 页码 1365-1371

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23589

关键词

MRI; diffusion-weighted imaging; apparent diffusion coefficient; rectal cancer; prognosis; biomarker

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To assess the value of diffusion-weighted MR imaging (DWI) as a potential noninvasive marker of tumor aggressiveness in rectal cancer, by analyzing the relationship between tumoral apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values and MRI and histological prognostic parameters. Materials and Methods: Fifty rectal cancer patients underwent primary staging MRI including DWI before surgery and neo-adjuvant therapy. In 47, surgery was preceded by short-course radiation therapy (n = 28) or long-course chemoradiation therapy (n = 19). Mean tumor ADC was measured and compared between subgroups based on pretreatment CEA levels, MRI parameters (mesorectal fascia - MRF - status; T-stage; N-stage) and histological parameters (differentiation grade: poorly differentiated, poorly moderately differentiated, moderately differentiated, moderately well differentiated, well-differentiated; lymphangiovascular invasion). Results: Mean tumor ADCs differ between MRF-free versus MRF-invaded tumors (P = 0.013), the groups of cN0 versus cN+ cancers (P = 0.011), and between the several groups of histological differentiation grades (P = 0.025). There was no significant difference in mean ADCs between the various groups of CEA levels, the T stage, and the presence of lymphangiovascular invasion. Conclusion: Lower ADC values were associated with a more aggressive tumor profile. Significant correlations were found between mean ADC values and radiological MRF status, N stage and differentiation grade. ADC has the potential to become an imaging biomarker of tumor aggressiveness profile. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2012;. (c) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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

4.7
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