Assessment of Apparent Diffusion Coefficients and SUVs as Predicators of Histological Differentiation in Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
Journal
Clinical nuclear medicine
ISSN: 1536-0229
Titre abrégé: Clin Nucl Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7611109
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Oct 2021
01 Oct 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
10
7
2021
medline:
16
10
2021
entrez:
9
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The study aims to assess minimal apparent diffusion coefficient (ADCmin) and SUVmax as predictors of histological differentiation in patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) and to determine cutoff values for each histopathological tumor grade. A retrospective study of 41 ASCC patients (14 males, 27 females; mean age, 65 ± 13 years) staged with FDG PET/CT and MRI (mean scan time interval, 21 ± 11 days). SUVmax and ADCmin values were measured and compared with histopathological tumor grading obtained from biopsy. The mean size and tumor volume were 3 ± 2 cm and 16.5 ± 27.3 cm3, respectively. The mean ADCmin values for well-, moderately, and poorly differentiated ASCC were 935 ± 179, 896 ± 123, and 637 ± 114, respectively. The mean SUVmax for well-, moderately, and poorly differentiated ASCC were 6.9 ± 1.8, 11.5 ± 4.1, and 13.4 ± 2.6, respectively. The difference in mean ADCmin values between poorly and moderately/well-differentiated tumors was statistically significant, whereas this was not significant between moderately and well-differentiated tumors. Differences in SUVmax values were statistically significant between poorly/moderately and well-differentiated tumors, whereas there was no statistical significance between poorly and moderately differentiated tumors. By combining the 2 modalities using cutoff values of 675 × 10-6 mm2·s-1 for ADCmin and 8.5 for SUVmax, it was possible to differentiate the tumor categories with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value, respectively, of 84.6%, 96.4%, 91.7%, and 93.1% for well-differentiated ASCC, 76.5%, 87.5%, 81.3%, and 84% for moderately, and 90.9%, 89.3%, 76.9%, and 96.2% for poorly differentiated ASCC, respectively. ADCmin and SUVmax values correlated with the degree of differentiation in ASCC and can be used as predictors of tumor grading and aggressiveness. Combined ADCmin and SUVmax cutoff values can therefore be used for early patient risk stratification and treatment decision making.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34238797
doi: 10.1097/RLU.0000000000003795
pii: 00003072-202110000-00001
doi:
Substances chimiques
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
0Z5B2CJX4D
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
783-789Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declared.
Références
Kochhar R, Plumb AA, Carrington BM, et al. Imaging of anal carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol . 2012;199:W335–W344.
Nelson VM, Benson AB 3rd. Epidemiology of anal canal cancer. Surg Oncol Clin N Am . 2017;26:9–15.
Symer MM, Yeo HL. Recent advances in the management of anal cancer. F1000Res . 2018;7.
Jones M, Hruby G, Solomon M, et al. The role of FDG-PET in the initial staging and response assessment of anal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol . 2015;22:3574–3581.
Nigro ND, Seydel HG, Considine B, et al. Combined preoperative radiation and chemotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal. Cancer . 1983;51:1826–1829.
Nigro ND. The force of change in the management of squamous-cell cancer of the anal canal. Dis Colon Rectum . 1991;34:482–486.
Eng C, Chang GJ, You YN, et al. The role of systemic chemotherapy and multidisciplinary management in improving the overall survival of patients with metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal. Oncotarget . 2014;5:11133–11142.
Gilshtein H, Khoury W. Surgical management of anal cancer. Minerva Chir . 2015;70:141–145.
Bilimoria KY, Bentrem DJ, Rock CE, et al. Outcomes and prognostic factors for squamous-cell carcinoma of the anal canal: analysis of patients from the National Cancer Data Base. Dis Colon Rectum . 2009;52:624–631.
Bollineni VR, Kramer G, Liu Y, et al. A literature review of the association between diffusion-weighted MRI derived apparent diffusion coefficient and tumour aggressiveness in pelvic cancer. Cancer Treat Rev . 2015;41:496–502.
Curvo-Semedo L, Lambregts DM, Maas M, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI in rectal cancer: apparent diffusion coefficient as a potential noninvasive marker of tumor aggressiveness. J Magn Reson Imaging . 2012;35:1365–1371.
Cima S, Perrone AM, Castellucci P, et al. Prognostic impact of pretreatment fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography SUV max in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer . 2018;28:575–580.
Fathinul F, Nordin AJ, Lau WF. 18 [F]FDG-PET/CT is a useful molecular marker in evaluating tumour aggressiveness: a revised understanding of an in-vivo FDG-PET imaging that alludes the alteration of cancer biology. Cell Biochem Biophys . 2013;66:37–43.
Boellaard R, O’Doherty MJ, Weber WA, et al. FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging . 2010;37:181–200.
Bhuva NJ, Glynne-Jones R, Sonoda L, et al. To PET or not to PET? That is the question. Staging in anal cancer. Ann Oncol . 2012;23:2078–2082.
Ciombor KK, Ernst RD, Brown G. Diagnosis and diagnostic imaging of anal canal cancer. Surg Oncol Clin N Am . 2017;26:45–55.
Cotter SE, Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, et al. FDG-PET/CT in the evaluation of anal carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys . 2006;65:720–725.
Durot C, Dohan A, Boudiaf M, et al. Cancer of the anal canal: diagnosis, staging and follow-up with MRI. Korean J Radiol . 2017;18:946–956.
Mahmud A, Poon R, Jonker D. PET imaging in anal canal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Radiol . 2017;90:20170370.
Winton E, Heriot AG, Ng M, et al. The impact of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography on the staging, management and outcome of anal cancer. Br J Cancer . 2009;100:693–700.
Chapet O, Gerard JP, Mornex F, et al. Prognostic factors of squamous cell carcinoma of the anal margin treated by radiotherapy: the Lyon experience. Int J Colorectal Dis . 2007;22:191–199.
Wan Z, Huang Z, Vikash V, et al. Survival rate variation with different histological subtypes of poor prognostic male anal squamous cell carcinoma: a population-based study. Oncotarget . 2017;8:84349–84359.
McVeigh PZ, Syed AM, Milosevic M, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI in cervical cancer. Eur Radiol . 2008;18:1058–1064.
Onal C, Erbay G, Guler OC. Treatment response evaluation using the mean apparent diffusion coefficient in cervical cancer patients treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy. J Magn Reson Imaging . 2016;44:1010–1019.
Cong Q, Li G, Wang Y, et al. DW-MRI for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, correlations between ADC values with histologic differentiation and VEGF expression: a retrospective study. Oncol Lett . 2019;17:2770–2776.
Suarez-Pinera M, Belda-Sanchis J, Taus A, et al. FDG PET-CT SUV max and IASLC/ATS/ERS histologic classification: a new profile of lung adenocarcinoma with prognostic value. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging . 2018;8:100–109.
Nakamura K, Kodama J, Okumura Y, et al. The SUV max of 18 F-FDG PET correlates with histological grade in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer . 2010;20:110–115.
Gong J, Wang N, Bian L, et al. Cervical cancer evaluated with integrated (18)F-FDG PET/MR. Oncol Lett . 2019;18:1815–1823.
Floberg JM, Fowler KJ, Fuser D, et al. Spatial relationship of 2-deoxy-2-[(18)F]-fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance diffusion imaging metrics in cervical cancer. EJNMMI Res . 2018;8:52.
Deantonio L, Milia ME, Cena T, et al. Anal cancer FDG-PET standard uptake value: correlation with tumor characteristics, treatment response and survival. Radiol Med . 2016;121:54–59.
Gawlitza J, Reiss-Zimmermann M, Thormer G, et al. Impact of the use of an endorectal coil for 3 T prostate MRI on image quality and cancer detection rate. Sci Rep . 2017;7:40640.
Mazaheri Y, Vargas HA, Nyman G, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI of the prostate at 3.0 T: comparison of endorectal coil (ERC) MRI and phased-array coil (PAC) MRI-The impact of SNR on ADC measurement. Eur J Radiol . 2013;82:e515–e520.
Torricelli P, Lo Russo S, Pecchi A, et al. Endorectal coil MRI in local staging of rectal cancer. Radiol Med . 2002;103:74–83.