Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-02-2016 | Gastrointestinal

Magnetization transfer imaging to assess tumour response after chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer

Authors: Milou H Martens, Doenja M. J. Lambregts, Nickolas Papanikolaou, Styliani Alefantinou, Monique Maas, Georgios C. Manikis, Kostantinos Marias, Robert G. Riedl, Geerard L. Beets, Regina G. H. Beets-Tan

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 2/2016

Abstract

Purpose

Single-slice magnetization transfer (MT) imaging has shown promising results for evaluating post-radiation fibrosis. The study aim was to evaluate the value of multislice MT imaging to assess tumour response after chemoradiotherapy by comparing magnetization transfer ratios (MTR) with histopathological tumour regression grade (TRG).

Materials and Methods

Thirty patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (cT3-4 and/or cN2) underwent routine restaging MRI 8 weeks post-chemoradiotherapy, including multislice MT-sequence, covering the entire tumour bed. Two independent readers delineated regions of interest on MTR maps, covering all potential remaining tumour and fibrotic areas. Mean MTR and histogram parameters (minimum, maximum, median, standard deviation, skewness, kurtosis, and 5-30-70-95th percentiles) were calculated. Reference standard was histological TRG1-2 (good response) and TRG3-5 (poor response).

Results

24/30 patients were male; mean age was 67.7 ± 10.8 years. Mean MTR rendered AUCs of 0.65 (reader1) and 0.87 (reader2) to differentiate between TRG1-2 versus TRG3-5. Best results were obtained for 95^th percentile (AUC 0.75- 0.88). Interobserver agreement was moderate (ICC 0.50) for mean MTR and good (ICC 0.80) for 95^th percentile.

Conclusions

MT imaging is a promising tool to assess tumour response post-chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer. Particularly, 95^th percentile results in AUCs up to 0.88 to discriminate a good tumour response.

Key Points

• The mean MTR can differentiate between good and poor responders after chemoradiation.

• In addition to measurement of the mean value, histogram analyses can be beneficial.

• The histogram parameter 95 ^th percentile can reach AUCs of 0.75–0.88.

Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W et al (2004) Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 351:1731–1740PubMedCrossRef

Coco C, Rizzo G, Mattana C et al (2013) Transanal endoscopic microsurgery after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy for locally advanced extraperitoneal rectal cancer: short-term morbidity and functional outcome. Surg Endosc 27:2860–2867PubMedCrossRef

Habr-Gama A, Perez RO, Nadalin W et al (2004) Operative versus nonoperative treatment for stage 0 distal rectal cancer following chemoradiation therapy: long-term results. Ann Surg 240:711–717, discussion 717–8 PubMedPubMedCentral

Maas M, Beets-Tan RG, Lambregts DM et al (2011) Wait-and-see policy for clinical complete responders after chemoradiation for rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 29:4633–4640PubMedCrossRef

Smith JD, Ruby JA, Goodman KA et al (2012) Nonoperative management of rectal cancer with complete clinical response after neoadjuvant therapy. Ann Surg 256:965–972PubMedCrossRef

Habr-Gama A, Perez RO, Wynn G, Marks J, Kessler H, Gama-Rodrigues J (2010) Complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy for distal rectal cancer: characterization of clinical and endoscopic findings for standardization. Dis Colon Rectum 53:1692–1698PubMedCrossRef

Vliegen RF, Beets GL, Lammering G et al (2008) Mesorectal fascia invasion after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: accuracy of MR imaging for prediction. Radiology 246:454–462PubMedCrossRef

Beets-Tan RG, Lambregts DM, Maas M et al (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging for the clinical management of rectal cancer patients: recommendations from the 2012 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) consensus meeting. Eur Radiol 23:2522–2531PubMedCrossRef

Barbaro B, Vitale R, Leccisotti L et al (2010) Restaging locally advanced rectal cancer with MR imaging after chemoradiation therapy. Radiographics 30:699–716PubMedCrossRef

10.

van der Paardt MP, Zagers MB, Beets-Tan RG, Stoker J, Bipat S (2013) Patients who undergo preoperative chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer restaged by using diagnostic mr imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology

11.

Kluza E, Rozeboom ED, Maas M et al (2013) T2 weighted signal intensity evolution may predict pathological complete response after treatment for rectal cancer. Eur Radiol 23:253–261PubMedCrossRef

12.

Gollub MJ, Gultekin DH, Akin O et al (2011) Dynamic contrast enhanced-MRI for the detection of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Eur Radiol 22:821–831PubMedCrossRef

13.

Lambregts DM, Rao SX, Sassen S, et al (2014) 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. Ann Surg

14.

Kim SH, Lee JM, Hong SH et al (2009) Locally advanced rectal cancer: added value of diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the evaluation of tumor response to neoadjuvant chemo- and radiation therapy. Radiology 253:116–125PubMedCrossRef

15.

Adler J, Swanson SD, Schmiedlin-Ren P et al (2011) Magnetization transfer helps detect intestinal fibrosis in an animal model of Crohn disease. Radiology 259:127–135PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

16.

Martens MH, Lambregts DM, Papanikolaou N et al (2014) Magnetization transfer ratio: a potential biomarker for the assessment of postradiation fibrosis in patients with rectal cancer. Investig Radiol 49:29–34CrossRef

17.

Heijnen LA, Lambregts DM, Mondal D et al (2013) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in primary rectal cancer staging demonstrates but does not characterise lymph nodes. Eur Radiol 23:3354–3360PubMedCrossRef

18.

R Development Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org; Available from: http://www.R-project.org

19.

Quirke P, Durdey P, Dixon MF, Williams NS (1986) Local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma due to inadequate surgical resection. Histopathological study of lateral tumour spread and surgical excision. Lancet 2:996–999PubMedCrossRef

20.

Mandard AM, Dalibard F, Mandard JC et al (1994) Pathologic assessment of tumor regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy of esophageal carcinoma. Clinicopathologic correlations. Cancer 73:2680–2686PubMedCrossRef

21.

PatelUB, Taylor F, Blomqvist L, et al Magnetic resonance imaging-detected tumor response for locally advanced rectal cancer predicts survival outcomes: MERCURY experience. J Clin Oncol 29:3753–60

22.

Patel UB, Brown G, Rutten H et al (2012) Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and histopathological response to chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 19:2842–2852PubMedCrossRef

23.

Curvo-Semedo L, Lambregts DM, Maas M et al (2011) Rectal cancer: assessment of complete response to preoperative combined radiation therapy with chemotherapy–conventional MR volumetry versus diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 260:734–743PubMedCrossRef

24.

Ha HI, Kim AY, Yu CS, Park SH, Ha HK (2013) Locally advanced rectal cancer: diffusion-weighted MR tumour volumetry and the apparent diffusion coefficient for evaluating complete remission after preoperative chemoradiation therapy. Eur Radiol 23:3345–3353PubMedCrossRef

25.

Phinikaridou A, Andia ME, Saha P, Modarai B, Smith A, Botnar RM (2013) In vivo magnetization transfer and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging detects thrombus composition in a mouse model of deep vein thrombosis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 6:433–440PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

26.

Papanikolaou N, Maniatis V, Pappas J, Roussakis A, Efthimiadou R, Andreou J (2002) Biexponential T2 relaxation time analysis of the brain: correlation with magnetization transfer ratio. Investig Radiol 37:363–367CrossRef

Title: Magnetization transfer imaging to assess tumour response after chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer
Authors: Milou H Martens
Doenja M. J. Lambregts
Nickolas Papanikolaou
Styliani Alefantinou
Monique Maas
Georgios C. Manikis
Kostantinos Marias
Robert G. Riedl
Geerard L. Beets
Regina G. H. Beets-Tan
Publication date: 01-02-2016
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 2/2016
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3856-3

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Magnetization transfer imaging to assess tumour response after chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2016

Angiomyolipoma (AML) without visible fat: Ultrasound, CT and MR imaging features with pathological correlation

Apparent diffusion coefficient values of diffusion-weighted imaging for distinguishing focal pulmonary lesions and characterizing the subtype of lung cancer: a meta-analysis

Stepwise stent deployment technique for tandem intracranial aneurysms: a review of 21 cases

Visual assessment of early emphysema and interstitial abnormalities on CT is useful in lung cancer risk analysis

Conclusions for mammography screening after 25-year follow-up of the Canadian National Breast Cancer Screening Study (CNBSS)

Estimating GFR prior to contrast medium examinations—what the radiologist needs to know!