Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance to assess treatment response after neoadjuvant therapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer
- 162 Downloads
Our study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of rectal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for local restaging in patients with non-metastatic locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) using surgical histopathology of total mesorectal excision as the reference standard.
Ninety-five patients with LARC who underwent rectal MRI after CRT between January 2014 and December 2016 were included. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive value for local staging regarding T-stage, N-stage, circumferential resection margin, and MRI tumor regression grade (ymriTRG) were calculated, and inter-test agreements were assessed.
22/95 (23.2%) patients had radiological complete response (rCR), whereas 20/95 (21.1%) had pathological complete response (pCR). Among the patients with pCR, 11/20 (55%) had rCR. Fair agreement was demonstrated between ymriTRG and pathological TRG (ypTRG) (κ = 0.255). The sensitivity and specificity for detection of pCR were 61.1% (95% CI 35.7–82.7) and 89.6% (95% CI 80.6–95.4). For the detection of ypTRG grades 1 and 2, the corresponding values were 67.2% (95% CI 54.3–78.4) and 51.6 (95% CI 33.1–69.8). The accuracy of ymriTRG was 24.2% (95% CI 15.6–32.8). Inter-test agreement in TRG between MRI and pathology was overall fair (κ = 0.255) and slight (κ = 0.179), if TRG 1 + 2.
Qualitative assessment on MRI for diagnosing pCR showed moderate sensitivity and high specificity, whereas the diagnosis of TRG had moderate sensitivity and low specificity with slight to fair inter-test agreement when compared with pathological specimens.
KeywordsRectal neoplasms Magnetic resonance Neoadjuvant therapy
The authors have no support or funding to report.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
For this type of study formal consent is not required. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
- 5.NCCN. NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2018 Rectal Cancer 2018Google Scholar
- 6.Habr-Gama A, Perez RO, Nadalin W, Sabbaga J, Ribeiro U, Jr., Silva e Sousa AH, Jr., et al. Operative versus nonoperative treatment for stage 0 distal rectal cancer following chemoradiation therapy: long-term results. Ann Surg. 2004;240(4):711-7; discussion 7-8Google Scholar
- 9.Nahas SC, Rizkallah Nahas CS, Sparapan Marques CF, Ribeiro U, Cotti GC, Imperiale AR, et al. Pathologic Complete Response in Rectal Cancer: Can We Detect It? Lessons Learned From a Proposed Randomized Trial of Watch-and-Wait Treatment of Rectal Cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016;59(4):255-63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Mandard AM, Dalibard F, Mandard JC, Marnay J, Henry-Amar M, Petiot JF, et al. Pathologic assessment of tumor regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy of esophageal carcinoma. Clinicopathologic correlations. Cancer. 1994;73(11):2680-6Google Scholar
- 21.Bhoday J, Smith F, Siddiqui MR, Balyasnikova S, Swift RI, Perez R, et al. Magnetic Resonance Tumor Regression Grade and Residual Mucosal Abnormality as Predictors for Pathological Complete Response in Rectal Cancer Postneoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016;59(10):925-33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Tulchinsky H, Shmueli E, Figer A, Klausner JM, Rabau M. An interval > 7 weeks between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery improves pathologic complete response and disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Annals of surgical oncology. 2008;15(10):2661-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Garcia-Aguilar J, Marcet J, Coutsoftides T, Cataldo P, Fichera A, Smith LE, et al. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy following chemoradiation on tumor response, adverse events, and surgical complications in patients with advanced rectal cancer treated with TME. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(15)Google Scholar
- 26.Lambregts DM, Rao SX, Sassen S, Martens MH, Heijnen LA, Buijsen J, et al. MRI and Diffusion-weighted MRI Volumetry for Identification of Complete Tumor Responders After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy in Patients With Rectal Cancer: A Bi-institutional Validation Study. Annals of surgery. 2015;262(6):1034-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Hotker AM, Tarlinton L, Mazaheri Y, Woo KM, Gonen M, Saltz LB, et al. Multiparametric MRI in the assessment of response of rectal cancer to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: A comparison of morphological, volumetric and functional MRI parameters. European radiology. 2016;26(12):4303-12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.van den Broek JJ, van der Wolf FS, Lahaye MJ, Heijnen LA, Meischl C, Heitbrink MA, et al. Accuracy of MRI in Restaging Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer After Preoperative Chemoradiation. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017;60(3):274-83Google Scholar
- 30.Trakarnsanga A, Gonen M, Shia J, Nash GM, Temple LK, Guillem JG, et al. Comparison of Tumor Regression Grade Systems for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer After Multimodality Treatment. Jnci-Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2014;106(10)Google Scholar
- 33.Martens MH, Lambregts DM, Papanikolaou N, Heijnen LA, Riedl RG, zur Hausen A, et al. Magnetization transfer ratio: a potential biomarker for the assessment of postradiation fibrosis in patients with rectal cancer. Invest Radiol. 2014;49(1):29-34Google Scholar
- 34.Horvat N, Veeraraghavan H, Khan M, Blazic I, Zheng J, Capanu M, et al. MR Imaging of Rectal Cancer: Radiomics Analysis to Assess Treatment Response after Neoadjuvant Therapy. Radiology. 2018:172300Google Scholar
- 35.Cusumano D, Dinapoli N, Boldrini L, Chiloiro G, Gatta R, Masciocchi C, et al. Fractal-based radiomic approach to predict complete pathological response after chemo-radiotherapy in rectal cancer. Radiol Med. 2017Google Scholar