Predicting response to chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer via visual morphologic assessment and staging on baseline MRI: a multicenter and multireader study
Purpose Pre-treatment knowledge of the anticipated response of rectal tumors to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) could help to further optimize the treatment. Van Griethuysen et al. proposed a visual 5-point confidence score to predict the likelihood of response on baseline MRI. Aim was to evalua...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Abdominal imaging 2023-10, Vol.48 (10), p.3039-3049 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Purpose
Pre-treatment knowledge of the anticipated response of rectal tumors to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) could help to further optimize the treatment. Van Griethuysen et al. proposed a visual 5-point confidence score to predict the likelihood of response on baseline MRI. Aim was to evaluate this score in a multicenter and multireader study setting and compare it to two simplified (4-point and 2-point) adaptations in terms of diagnostic performance, interobserver agreement (IOA), and reader preference.
Methods
Twenty-two radiologists from 14 countries (5 MRI-experts,17 general/abdominal radiologists) retrospectively reviewed 90 baseline MRIs to estimate if patients would likely achieve a (near-)complete response (nCR); first using the 5-point score by van Griethuysen (1=highly unlikely to 5=highly likely to achieve nCR), second using a 4-point adaptation (with 1-point each for high-risk T-stage, obvious mesorectal fascia invasion, nodal involvement, and extramural vascular invasion), and third using a 2-point score (unlikely/likely to achieve nCR). Diagnostic performance was calculated using ROC curves and IOA using Krippendorf’s alpha (
α
).
Results
Areas under the ROC curve to predict the likelihood of a nCR were similar for the three methods (0.71–0.74). IOA was higher for the 5- and 4-point scores (
α
=0.55 and 0.57 versus 0.46 for the 2-point score) with best results for the MRI-experts (
α
=0.64-0.65). Most readers (55%) favored the 4-point score.
Conclusions
Visual morphologic assessment and staging methods can predict neoadjuvant treatment response with moderate–good performance. Compared to a previously published confidence-based scoring system, study readers preferred a simplified 4-point risk score based on high-risk T-stage, MRF involvement, nodal involvement, and EMVI.
Graphical abstract |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2366-0058 2366-004X 2366-0058 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00261-023-03961-7 |