Effectiveness of the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient for Predicting the Response to Chemoradiation Therapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

被引:32
作者
Xie, Haiting [1 ]
Sun, Tao [1 ]
Chen, Ming [2 ]
Wang, Hao [3 ]
Zhou, Xin [1 ]
Zhang, Yunkai [1 ]
Zeng, Huanhong [1 ]
Wang, Jilian [1 ]
Fu, Wei [1 ]
机构
[1] Peking Univ, Dept Gen Surg, Hosp 3, Beijing 100191, Peoples R China
[2] Peking Univ, Dept Radiol, Hosp 3, Beijing 100191, Peoples R China
[3] Peking Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, Hosp 3, Beijing 100191, Peoples R China
关键词
WEIGHTED MAGNETIC-RESONANCE; PREOPERATIVE CHEMORADIOTHERAPY; TUMOR RESPONSE; CARCINOMA; REGRESSION; VOLUMETRY; INDICATOR; OUTCOMES; PET/CT; MRI;
D O I
10.1097/MD.0000000000000517
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
The efficacy of the different apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) in predicting different responses to preoperative chemoradiation therapy (CRT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is controversial. We did this meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of different ADCs predicting different responses to CRT in patients with LARC. We systematically searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for articles published from January 1, 1990, to June 3, 2014. Pooled estimates were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model for the ADCs before and after CRT (pre-and post-ADC), as well as the change between the pre-and post-ADC (Delta ADC). The values of the 3 ADCs for judging different response endpoints, which were defined according to the tumor grading (TRG) system and downstaging of T (tumor) or N (nodal) stages (TN downstaging), were assessed. We included 16 studies with a total of 826 patients. The sensitivity, specificity, DOR, and AUC were 75% (95% CI 57%-87%), 70% (95% CI 50%-84%), 6.81 (95% CI 2.46-18.88), and 0.79 (95% CI 0.75-0.82), respectively, for the pre-ADC in predicting a good response; 76% (95% CI 63%-85%), 87% (95% CI 78%-92%), 20.68 (95% CI 11.76-36.39), and 0.89 (95% CI 0.86-0.91), respectively, for the post-ADC; and 78% (95% CI 65%-87%), 77% (95% CI 62%-87%), 11.82 (95% CI 4.65-30.04), and 0.84 (95% CI 0.81-0.87), respectively, for the Delta ADC. The post-ADC demonstrated the highest specificity and DOR (P < 0.001), although sensitivity did not differ between the 3 types of ADC (P = 0.380, 0.192, and 0.214). For predicting a pathological complete response (pCR), the post-ADC had the highest specificity (P < 0.001 and 0.030) but lowest sensitivity (P< 0.001). The Delta ADC had the highest DOR; however, this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.146). The ADC is a reliable and reproducible measure and could serve as a promising noninvasive tool for evaluating the response to CRT in patients with LARC; the post-ADC and Delta ADC are particularly promising. The Delta ADC had the highest diagnostic performance to predict a pCR compared with the pre-ADC and post-ADC. The value of the ADCs to predict T or N downstaging requires further investigation.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 43 条
  • [1] Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a Cancer Biomarker: Consensus and Recommendations
    不详
    [J]. NEOPLASIA, 2009, 11 (02): : 102 - 125
  • [2] Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Monitoring Rectal Cancer Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy
    Barbaro, Brunella
    Vitale, Renata
    Valentini, Vincenzo
    Illuminati, Sonia
    Vecchio, Fabio M.
    Rizzo, Gianluca
    Gambacorta, Maria Antonietta
    Coco, Claudio
    Crucitti, Antonio
    Persiani, Roberto
    Sofo, Luigi
    Bonomo, Lorenzo
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2012, 83 (02): : 594 - 599
  • [3] Rectal cancer: Local staging and assessment of lymph node involvement with endoluminal US, CT, and MR imaging - A meta-analysis
    Bipat, S
    Glas, AS
    Slors, FJM
    Zwinderman, AH
    Bossuyt, PMM
    Stoker, J
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2004, 232 (03) : 773 - 783
  • [4] Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for predicting the response of rectal cancer to neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation
    Cai, Gang
    Xu, Ye
    Zhu, Ji
    Gu, Wei-Lie
    Zhang, Shuai
    Ma, Xue-Jun
    Cai, San-Jun
    Zhang, Zhen
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2013, 19 (33) : 5520 - 5527
  • [5] Meta-analyses of diagnostic studies
    Cleophas, Ton J.
    Zwinderman, Aeilko H.
    [J]. CLINICAL CHEMISTRY AND LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2009, 47 (11) : 1351 - 1354
  • [6] Predictors of tumor response and downstaging in patients who receive preoperative chemoradiation for rectal cancer
    Das, Prajnan
    Skibber, John M.
    Rodriguez-Bigas, Miguel A.
    Feig, Barry W.
    Chang, George J.
    Wolff, Robert A.
    Eng, Cathy
    Krishnan, Sunil
    Jarl, Nora A.
    Crane, Christopher H.
    [J]. CANCER, 2007, 109 (09) : 1750 - 1755
  • [7] The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed
    Deeks, JJ
    Macaskill, P
    Irwig, L
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2005, 58 (09) : 882 - 893
  • [8] Pathological features of rectal cancer after preoperative radiochemotherapy
    Dworak, O
    Keilholz, L
    Hoffmann, A
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE, 1997, 12 (01) : 19 - 23
  • [9] Apparent diffusion coefficient as a non-invasive predictor of treatment response and recurrence in locally advanced rectal cancer
    Elmi, A.
    Hedgire, S. S.
    Covarrubias, D.
    Abtahi, S. M.
    Hahn, P. F.
    Harisinghani, M.
    [J]. CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2013, 68 (10) : E524 - E531
  • [10] Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance for prediction of response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: Preliminary results of a monoinstitutional prospective study
    Genovesi, D.
    Filippone, A.
    Cefaro, G. Ausili
    Trignani, M.
    Vinciguerra, A.
    Augurio, A.
    Di Tommaso, M.
    Borzillo, V.
    Sabatino, F.
    Innocenti, P.
    Liberatore, E.
    Colecchia, G.
    Tartaro, A.
    Cotroneo, A. R.
    [J]. EJSO, 2013, 39 (10): : 1071 - 1078