Diagnostic performance of Node Reporting and Data System (Node-RADS) for assessing mesorectal lymph node in rectal cancer by CT.
Computed tomography
Lymph node
Node-RADS
Rectal cancer
X-ray
Journal
BMC cancer
ISSN: 1471-2407
Titre abrégé: BMC Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Jun 2024
11 Jun 2024
Historique:
received:
24
02
2024
accepted:
07
06
2024
medline:
12
6
2024
pubmed:
12
6
2024
entrez:
11
6
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To compare the diagnostic performance of the Node-RADS scoring system and lymph node (LN) size in preoperative LN assessment for rectal cancer (RC), and to investigate whether the selection of size as the primary criterion whereas morphology as the secondary criterion for LNs can be considered the preferred method for clinical assessment. Preoperative CT data of 146 RC patients treated with radical resection surgery were retrospectively analyzed. The Node-RADS score and short-axis diameter of size-prioritized LNs and the morphology-prioritized LNs were obtained. The correlations of Node-RADS score to the pN stage, LNM number and lymph node ratio (LNR) were investigated. The performances on assessing pathological lymph node metastasis were compared between Node-RADS score and short-axis diameter. A nomogram combined the Node-RADS score and clinical features was also evaluated. Node-RADS score showed significant correlation with pN stage, LNM number and LNR (Node-RADS of size-prioritized LN: r = 0.600, 0.592, and 0.606; Node-RADS of morphology-prioritized LN: r = 0.547, 0.538, and 0.527; Node-RADSmax: r = 0.612, 0.604, and 0.610; all p < 0.001). For size-prioritized LN, Node-RADS achieved an AUC of 0.826, significantly superior to short-axis diameter (0.826 vs. 0.743, p = 0.009). For morphology-prioritized LN, Node-RADS exhibited an AUC of 0.758, slightly better than short-axis diameter (0.758 vs. 0.718, p = 0.098). The Node-RADS score of size-prioritized LN was significantly better than that of morphology-prioritized LN (0.826 vs. 0.758, p = 0.038). The nomogram achieved the best diagnostic performance (AUC = 0.861) than all the other assessment methods (p < 0.05). The Node-RADS scoring system outperforms the short-axis diameter in predicting lymph node metastasis in RC. Size-prioritized LN demonstrates superior predictive efficacy compared to morphology-prioritized LN. The nomogram combined the Node-RADS score of size-prioritized LN with clinical features exhibits the best diagnostic performance. Moreover, a clear relationship was demonstrated between the Node-RADS score and the quantity-dependent pathological characteristics of LNM.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To compare the diagnostic performance of the Node-RADS scoring system and lymph node (LN) size in preoperative LN assessment for rectal cancer (RC), and to investigate whether the selection of size as the primary criterion whereas morphology as the secondary criterion for LNs can be considered the preferred method for clinical assessment.
METHODS
METHODS
Preoperative CT data of 146 RC patients treated with radical resection surgery were retrospectively analyzed. The Node-RADS score and short-axis diameter of size-prioritized LNs and the morphology-prioritized LNs were obtained. The correlations of Node-RADS score to the pN stage, LNM number and lymph node ratio (LNR) were investigated. The performances on assessing pathological lymph node metastasis were compared between Node-RADS score and short-axis diameter. A nomogram combined the Node-RADS score and clinical features was also evaluated.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Node-RADS score showed significant correlation with pN stage, LNM number and LNR (Node-RADS of size-prioritized LN: r = 0.600, 0.592, and 0.606; Node-RADS of morphology-prioritized LN: r = 0.547, 0.538, and 0.527; Node-RADSmax: r = 0.612, 0.604, and 0.610; all p < 0.001). For size-prioritized LN, Node-RADS achieved an AUC of 0.826, significantly superior to short-axis diameter (0.826 vs. 0.743, p = 0.009). For morphology-prioritized LN, Node-RADS exhibited an AUC of 0.758, slightly better than short-axis diameter (0.758 vs. 0.718, p = 0.098). The Node-RADS score of size-prioritized LN was significantly better than that of morphology-prioritized LN (0.826 vs. 0.758, p = 0.038). The nomogram achieved the best diagnostic performance (AUC = 0.861) than all the other assessment methods (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The Node-RADS scoring system outperforms the short-axis diameter in predicting lymph node metastasis in RC. Size-prioritized LN demonstrates superior predictive efficacy compared to morphology-prioritized LN. The nomogram combined the Node-RADS score of size-prioritized LN with clinical features exhibits the best diagnostic performance. Moreover, a clear relationship was demonstrated between the Node-RADS score and the quantity-dependent pathological characteristics of LNM.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38862951
doi: 10.1186/s12885-024-12487-0
pii: 10.1186/s12885-024-12487-0
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
716Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Feng RM, Zong YN, Cao SM, Xu RH. Current cancer situation in China: good or bad news from the 2018 Global Cancer Statistics? Cancer Commun (Lond). 2019;39(1):22.
pubmed: 31030667
Dekker E, Tanis PJ, Vleugels JLA, Kasi PM, Wallace MB. Colorectal cancer. Lancet. 2019;394(10207):1467–80.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32319-0
pubmed: 31631858
Jayaprakasam VS, Alvarez J, Omer DM, Gollub MJ, Smith JJ, Petkovska I. Watch-and-Wait Approach to Rectal Cancer: The Role of Imaging. Radiology. 2023;307(1): e221529.
doi: 10.1148/radiol.221529
pubmed: 36880951
Haddad P, Ghalehtaki R, Saeedian A, Farhan F, Babaei M, Aghili M. Current approaches in intensification of long-course chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: a review. Radiat Oncol J. 2021;39(2):83–90.
doi: 10.3857/roj.2021.00108
pubmed: 34619824
pmcid: 8497854
Pollack J, Holm T, Cedermark B, Holmström B, Mellgren A. Long-term effect of preoperative radiation therapy on anorectal function. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006;49(3):345–52.
doi: 10.1007/s10350-005-0296-1
pubmed: 16532369
Marijnen CA, van de Velde CJ, Putter H, van den Brink M, Maas CP, Martijn H, et al. Impact of short-term preoperative radiotherapy on health-related quality of life and sexual functioning in primary rectal cancer: report of a multicenter randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(9):1847–58.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.05.256
pubmed: 15774778
Benson AB, Venook AP, Al-Hawary MM, Azad N, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, et al. Rectal Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2022;20(10):1139–67.
doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2022.0051
pubmed: 36240850
Langman G, Patel A, Bowley DM. Size and distribution of lymph nodes in rectal cancer resection specimens. Dis Colon Rectum. 2015;58(4):406–14.
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000321
pubmed: 25751797
Brown G, Kirkham A, Williams GT, Bourne M, Radcliffe AG, Sayman J, et al. High-resolution MRI of the anatomy important in total mesorectal excision of the rectum. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;182(2):431–9.
doi: 10.2214/ajr.182.2.1820431
pubmed: 14736677
Rollvén E, Blomqvist L, Öistämö E, Hjern F, Csanaky G, Abraham-Nordling M. Morphological predictors for lymph node metastases on computed tomography in colon cancer. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2019;44(5):1712–21.
doi: 10.1007/s00261-019-01900-z
pubmed: 30767041
Bogach J, Tsai S, Zbuk K, Wong R, Grubac V, Coates A, et al. Quality of preoperative pelvic computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for rectal cancer in a region in Ontario: A retrospective population-based study. J Surg Oncol. 2018;117(5):1038–42.
doi: 10.1002/jso.25000
pubmed: 29473947
Li S, Li Z, Wang L, Wu M, Chen X, He C, et al. CT morphological features for predicting the risk of lymph node metastasis in T1 colorectal cancer. Eur Radiol. 2023;33(10):6861–71.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-023-09688-9
pubmed: 37171490
Filippone A, Ambrosini R, Fuschi M, Marinelli T, Genovesi D, Bonomo L. Preoperative T and N staging of colorectal cancer: accuracy of contrast-enhanced multi-detector row CT colonography–initial experience. Radiology. 2004;231(1):83–90.
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2311021152
pubmed: 14990815
Strauss SB, Aiken AH, Lantos JE, Phillips CD. Best Practices: Application of NI-RADS for Posttreatment Surveillance Imaging of Head and Neck Cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2021;216(6):1438–51.
doi: 10.2214/AJR.20.23841
pubmed: 32876470
Chernyak V, Fowler KJ, Do RKG, Kamaya A, Kono Y, Tang A, et al. LI-RADS: Looking Back, Looking Forward. Radiology. 2023;307(1): e222801.
doi: 10.1148/radiol.222801
pubmed: 36853182
Elsholtz FHJ, Asbach P, Haas M, Becker M, Beets-Tan RGH, Thoeny HC, et al. Introducing the Node Reporting and Data System 1.0 (Node-RADS): a concept for standardized assessment of lymph nodes in cancer. Eur Radiol. 2021;31(8):6116–24.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-07572-4
pubmed: 33585994
pmcid: 8270876
Lucciola S, Pisciotti ML, Frisenda M, Magliocca F, Gentilucci A, Del Giudice F, et al. Predictive role of node-rads score in patients with prostate cancer candidates for radical prostatectomy with extended lymph node dissection: comparative analysis with validated nomograms. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2023;26(2):379–87.
doi: 10.1038/s41391-022-00564-z
pubmed: 35732820
Leonardo C, Flammia RS, Lucciola S, Proietti F, Pecoraro M, Bucca B, et al. Performance of Node-RADS Scoring System for a Standardized Assessment of Regional Lymph Nodes in Bladder Cancer Patients. Cancers (Basel). 2023;15(3).
Meyer HJ, Schnarkowski B, Pappisch J, Kerkhoff T, Wirtz H, Höhn AK, et al. CT texture analysis and node-RADS CT score of mediastinal lymph nodes - diagnostic performance in lung cancer patients. Cancer Imaging. 2022;22(1):75.
doi: 10.1186/s40644-022-00506-x
pubmed: 36567339
pmcid: 9791752
Maggialetti N, Greco CN, Lucarelli NM, Morelli C, Cianci V, Sasso S, et al. Applications of new radiological scores: the Node-rads in colon cancer staging. Radiol Med. 2023;128(11):1287–95.
doi: 10.1007/s11547-023-01703-9
pubmed: 37704777
Wu Q, Lou J, Liu J, Dong L, Wu Q, Wu Y, et al. Performance of node reporting and data system (node-RADS): a preliminary study in cervical cancer. BMC Med Imaging. 2024;24(1):28.
doi: 10.1186/s12880-024-01205-8
pubmed: 38279127
pmcid: 10811875
Amin BM, Greene FL, Edge SB, Compton CC, Gershenwald JE, Brookland RK, et al. The Eighth Edition AJCC Cancer Staging Manual: Continuing to build a bridge from a population-based to a more “personalized” approach to cancer staging. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(2):93–9.
doi: 10.3322/caac.21388
pubmed: 28094848
Beets-Tan RGH, Lambregts DMJ, Maas M, Bipat S, Barbaro B, Curvo-Semedo L, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for clinical management of rectal cancer: Updated recommendations from the 2016 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) consensus meeting. Eur Radiol. 2018;28(4):1465–75.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-5026-2
pubmed: 29043428
Dziak JJ, Coffman DL, Lanza ST, Li R, Jermiin LS. Sensitivity and specificity of information criteria. Brief Bioinform. 2020;21(2):553–65.
doi: 10.1093/bib/bbz016
pubmed: 30895308
Matsuoka H, Nakamura A, Masaki T, Sugiyama M, Nitatori T, Ohkura Y, et al. Optimal diagnostic criteria for lateral pelvic lymph node metastasis in rectal carcinoma. Anticancer Res. 2007;27(5b):3529–33.
pubmed: 17972513
Gröne J, Loch FN, Taupitz M, Schmidt C, Kreis ME. Accuracy of Various Lymph Node Staging Criteria in Rectal Cancer with Magnetic Resonance Imaging. J Gastrointest Surg. 2018;22(1):146–53.
doi: 10.1007/s11605-017-3568-x
pubmed: 28900855
Bedrikovetski S, Dudi-Venkata NN, Kroon HM, Seow W, Vather R, Carneiro G, et al. Artificial intelligence for pre-operative lymph node staging in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cancer. 2021;21(1):1058.
doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08773-w
pubmed: 34565338
pmcid: 8474828
Song G, Li P, Wu R, Jia Y, Hong Y, He R, et al. Development and validation of a high-resolution T2WI-based radiomic signature for the diagnosis of lymph node status within the mesorectum in rectal cancer. Front Oncol. 2022;12: 945559.
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.945559
pubmed: 36185279
pmcid: 9523667
NCCN. clinical practice guidelines in oncology (rectal cancer, Version 1.2024),available at https://www.nccn.org/guidelines/guidelines-detail?category=1&id=1461
Chen L, Huang X, Song Z. The value of lymph node ratio in the prediction of rectal cancer patient survival after preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2018;11(12):5992–6001.
pubmed: 31949687
pmcid: 6963083
Zuo ZG, Zhang XF, Wang H, Liu QZ, Ye XZ, Xu C, et al. Prognostic Value of Lymph Node Ratio in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Total Mesorectal Excision. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(9): e2988.
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000002988
pubmed: 26945418
Zhou D, Ye M, Bai Y, Rong L, Hou Y. Prognostic value of lymph node ratio in survival of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Can J Surg. 2015;58(4):237–44.
doi: 10.1503/cjs.001515
pubmed: 26022151
pmcid: 4512865
Rausei S, Iovino D, Tenconi S, Mangano A, Inversini D, Boni L, et al. Impact of lymph node ratio on survival of colorectal cancer patients. Int J Surg. 2013;11(Suppl 1):S95–9.
doi: 10.1016/S1743-9191(13)60026-6
pubmed: 24380564
Kim JY, Chung SM, Choi BO, Lee IK, An CH, Won JM, et al. Prognostic significance of the lymph node ratio regarding recurrence and survival in rectal cancer patients treated with postoperative chemoradiotherapy. Gut Liver. 2012;6(2):203–9.
doi: 10.5009/gnl.2012.6.2.203
pubmed: 22570749
pmcid: 3343158
Pach R, Szczepanik AM, Sierzega M, Daniluk M, Richter P. Prognostic value of lymph node ratio in resectable rectal cancer after preoperative short-course radiotherapy-results from randomized clinical trial. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2022;407(7):2969–80.
doi: 10.1007/s00423-022-02603-8
pubmed: 35788774
Xu H, Zhao W, Guo W, Cao S, Gao C, Song T, et al. Prediction Model Combining Clinical and MR Data for Diagnosis of Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients With Rectal Cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2021;53(3):874–83.
doi: 10.1002/jmri.27369
pubmed: 32978993
Li H, Chen XL, Liu H, Lu T, Li ZL. MRI-based multiregional radiomics for predicting lymph nodes status and prognosis in patients with resectable rectal cancer. Front Oncol. 2022;12:1087882.
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1087882
pubmed: 36686763
Chen LD, Liang JY, Wu H, Wang Z, Li SR, Li W, et al. Multiparametric radiomics improve prediction of lymph node metastasis of rectal cancer compared with conventional radiomics. Life Sci. 2018;208:55–63.
doi: 10.1016/j.lfs.2018.07.007
pubmed: 29990485
Glasgow SC, Bleier JI, Burgart LJ, Finne CO, Lowry AC. Meta-analysis of histopathological features of primary colorectal cancers that predict lymph node metastases. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(5):1019–28.
doi: 10.1007/s11605-012-1827-4
pubmed: 22258880