Cargando…
Assessment of histologic prognostic factors of resectable rectal cancer: comparison of diagnostic performance using various apparent diffusion coefficient parameters
This study is to investigate optimum apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) parameter for predicting lymphovascular invasion (LVI), lymph node metastasis (LNM) and histology type in resectable rectal cancer. 58 consecutive patients with resectable rectal cancer were retrospectively identified. The min...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7360736/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32665546 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68328-0 |
_version_ | 1783559269133582336 |
---|---|
author | Li, Hang Chen, Guang-wen Liu, Yi-Sha Pu, Hong Yin, Long-lin Hou, Neng-yi Chen, Xiao-li |
author_facet | Li, Hang Chen, Guang-wen Liu, Yi-Sha Pu, Hong Yin, Long-lin Hou, Neng-yi Chen, Xiao-li |
author_sort | Li, Hang |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study is to investigate optimum apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) parameter for predicting lymphovascular invasion (LVI), lymph node metastasis (LNM) and histology type in resectable rectal cancer. 58 consecutive patients with resectable rectal cancer were retrospectively identified. The minimum, maximum, average ADC and ADC difference value were obtained on ADC maps. Maximum ADC and ADC difference value increased with the appearance of LVI (r = 0.501 and 0.495, P < 0.001, respectively) and development of N category (r = 0.615 and 0.695, P < 0.001, respectively). ADC difference value tended to rise with lower tumor differentiation (r = − 0.269, P = 0.041). ADC difference value was an independent risk factor for predicting LVI (odds ratio = 1.323; P = 0.005) and LNM (odds ratio = 1.526; P = 0.005). Maximum ADC and ADC difference value could distinguish N0 from N1 category, N0 from N1–N2, N0–N1 from N2 (all P < 0.001). Only ADC difference value could distinguish histology type (P = 0.041). ADC difference value had higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve than maximum ADC in identifying LVI (0.828 vs 0.797), N0 from N1 category (0.947 vs 0.847), N0 from N1–N2 (0.935 vs 0.874), and N0–N1 from N2 (0.814 vs 0.770). ADC difference value may be superior to the other ADC value parameters to predict LVI, N category and histology type of resectable rectal cancer. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7360736 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73607362020-07-16 Assessment of histologic prognostic factors of resectable rectal cancer: comparison of diagnostic performance using various apparent diffusion coefficient parameters Li, Hang Chen, Guang-wen Liu, Yi-Sha Pu, Hong Yin, Long-lin Hou, Neng-yi Chen, Xiao-li Sci Rep Article This study is to investigate optimum apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) parameter for predicting lymphovascular invasion (LVI), lymph node metastasis (LNM) and histology type in resectable rectal cancer. 58 consecutive patients with resectable rectal cancer were retrospectively identified. The minimum, maximum, average ADC and ADC difference value were obtained on ADC maps. Maximum ADC and ADC difference value increased with the appearance of LVI (r = 0.501 and 0.495, P < 0.001, respectively) and development of N category (r = 0.615 and 0.695, P < 0.001, respectively). ADC difference value tended to rise with lower tumor differentiation (r = − 0.269, P = 0.041). ADC difference value was an independent risk factor for predicting LVI (odds ratio = 1.323; P = 0.005) and LNM (odds ratio = 1.526; P = 0.005). Maximum ADC and ADC difference value could distinguish N0 from N1 category, N0 from N1–N2, N0–N1 from N2 (all P < 0.001). Only ADC difference value could distinguish histology type (P = 0.041). ADC difference value had higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve than maximum ADC in identifying LVI (0.828 vs 0.797), N0 from N1 category (0.947 vs 0.847), N0 from N1–N2 (0.935 vs 0.874), and N0–N1 from N2 (0.814 vs 0.770). ADC difference value may be superior to the other ADC value parameters to predict LVI, N category and histology type of resectable rectal cancer. Nature Publishing Group UK 2020-07-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7360736/ /pubmed/32665546 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68328-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Li, Hang Chen, Guang-wen Liu, Yi-Sha Pu, Hong Yin, Long-lin Hou, Neng-yi Chen, Xiao-li Assessment of histologic prognostic factors of resectable rectal cancer: comparison of diagnostic performance using various apparent diffusion coefficient parameters |
title | Assessment of histologic prognostic factors of resectable rectal cancer: comparison of diagnostic performance using various apparent diffusion coefficient parameters |
title_full | Assessment of histologic prognostic factors of resectable rectal cancer: comparison of diagnostic performance using various apparent diffusion coefficient parameters |
title_fullStr | Assessment of histologic prognostic factors of resectable rectal cancer: comparison of diagnostic performance using various apparent diffusion coefficient parameters |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessment of histologic prognostic factors of resectable rectal cancer: comparison of diagnostic performance using various apparent diffusion coefficient parameters |
title_short | Assessment of histologic prognostic factors of resectable rectal cancer: comparison of diagnostic performance using various apparent diffusion coefficient parameters |
title_sort | assessment of histologic prognostic factors of resectable rectal cancer: comparison of diagnostic performance using various apparent diffusion coefficient parameters |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7360736/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32665546 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68328-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lihang assessmentofhistologicprognosticfactorsofresectablerectalcancercomparisonofdiagnosticperformanceusingvariousapparentdiffusioncoefficientparameters AT chenguangwen assessmentofhistologicprognosticfactorsofresectablerectalcancercomparisonofdiagnosticperformanceusingvariousapparentdiffusioncoefficientparameters AT liuyisha assessmentofhistologicprognosticfactorsofresectablerectalcancercomparisonofdiagnosticperformanceusingvariousapparentdiffusioncoefficientparameters AT puhong assessmentofhistologicprognosticfactorsofresectablerectalcancercomparisonofdiagnosticperformanceusingvariousapparentdiffusioncoefficientparameters AT yinlonglin assessmentofhistologicprognosticfactorsofresectablerectalcancercomparisonofdiagnosticperformanceusingvariousapparentdiffusioncoefficientparameters AT hounengyi assessmentofhistologicprognosticfactorsofresectablerectalcancercomparisonofdiagnosticperformanceusingvariousapparentdiffusioncoefficientparameters AT chenxiaoli assessmentofhistologicprognosticfactorsofresectablerectalcancercomparisonofdiagnosticperformanceusingvariousapparentdiffusioncoefficientparameters |