Interobserver variability in MRI measurements of mesorectal invasion depth in rectal cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariana M. Chaves ◽  
Henrique Donato ◽  
Nuno Campos ◽  
David Silva ◽  
Luís Curvo-Semedo
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Interobserver Variability ◽  
Invasion Depth ◽  
Mri Measurements

scholarly journals Height of Rectal Cancer: A Comparison between Rectoscopic and Different MRI Measurements

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. I. Attenberger ◽  
J. Winter ◽  
F. N. Harder ◽  
I. Burkholder ◽  
D. Dinter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Anal Canal ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Anal Verge ◽  
Measurement Techniques ◽  
Primary Rectal Cancer ◽  
Height Determination ◽  
Lower Border ◽  
Straight Line ◽  
Mri Measurements

Purpose. To compare rigid rectoscopy with three different MRI measurement techniques for rectal cancer height determination, all starting at the anal verge, in order to evaluate whether MRI measurements starting from the anal verge could be an alternative to rigid rectoscopy. Moreover, potential cut-off values for MRI in categorizing tumor height measurements were evaluated. Methods. In this retrospective study, 106 patients (75 men, 31 female, mean age 64±11.59 years) with primary rectal cancer underwent rigid rectoscopy as well as MR imaging. Three different measurements (MRI1–3) in T2w sagittal scans were used to evaluate the exact distance from the anal verge (AV) to the distal ending of the tumor (MRI1: two unbowed lines, AV to the upper ending of the anal canal and upper ending of the anal canal to the lower border of the tumor; MRI2: one straight line from the AV to the lower boarder of the tumor; MRI3: a curved line beginning at the AV and following the course of the rectum wall ending at the lower border of the tumor). Furthermore, agreement between the gold standard rigid rectoscopy (UICC classification: low part, 0-6 cm; mid part, 6-12 cm; and high part, >12 cm) and each MRI measuring technique was analyzed. Results. Only a fair correlation in terms of individual measures between rectoscopy and all 3 MRI measurement techniques was shown. The proposed new cut-off values utilizing ROC analysis for the three different MRI beginning at the anal verge were low 0-7.7 cm, mid 7.7-13.3 cm, and high>13.3 cm (MRI1); low 0-7.4 cm, mid 7.4-11.2 cm, and high>11.2 cm (MRI2); and low 0-7.1 cm, mid 7.1-13.7 cm, and high>13.7 cm (MRI3). For MRI1 and MRI3, the agreement to the gold standard was substantial (r=0.66, r=0.67, respectively). Conclusion. This study illustrates that MRI1 and MRI3 measures can be interchangeably used as a valid method to determine tumor height compared to the gold standard rigid rectoscopy.

International study group on rectal cancer regression grading: interobserver variability with commonly used regression grading systems

2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (11) ◽  
pp. 1917-1923 ◽  
Author(s):  
Runjan Chetty ◽  
Pelvender Gill ◽  
Dhirendra Govender ◽  
Adrian Bateman ◽  
Hee Jin Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Interobserver Variability ◽  
International Study ◽  
Study Group ◽  
International Study Group ◽  
Regression Grading ◽  
Grading Systems ◽  
Cancer Regression

Interobserver Variability in Assessing Pathologic Response to Preoperative Treatment in Rectal Cancer: Standardization of an Evaluation Method and Comparisons Between Published Scales

2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 709-713
Author(s):  
Leonardo S. Lino-Silva ◽  
Janet C. Guzmán-López ◽  
Jenny A. Salazar-García ◽  
Jazmín D. Chávez-Hernández ◽  
Armando Gamboa-Domínguez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Interobserver Variability ◽  
Pathologic Response ◽  
Preoperative Treatment

scholarly journals Interobserver variability in target volume delineation for CT/MRI simulation and MRI guided adaptive radiotherapy in rectal cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid White ◽  
Arabella Hunt ◽  
Thomas Bird ◽  
Sarah Settatree ◽  
Heba Soliman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Interobserver Variability ◽  
Target Volume ◽  
Adaptive Radiotherapy ◽  
3D Mri ◽  
Target Volume Delineation ◽  
Volume Delineation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Mri Guided ◽  
2D And 3D

Objectives: Quantify target volume delineation uncertainty for CT/MRI simulation and MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy in rectal cancer. Define optimal imaging sequences for target delineation. Methods: Six experienced radiation oncologists delineated CTVs on CT and 2D and 3D-MRI in three patients with rectal cancer, using consensus contouring guidelines. Tumour GTV (GTVp) was also contoured on MRI acquired week 0 and 3 of radiotherapy. A STAPLE contour was created and volume and interobserver variability metrics were analysed. Results: There were statistically significant differences in volume between observers for CT and 2D-MRI-defined CTVs (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between observers on 3D-MRI. Significant differences in volume were seen between observers for both 2D and 3D-MRI-defined GTVp at weeks 0 and 3 (p < 0.05). Good interobserver agreement (IOA) was seen for CTVs delineated on all imaging modalities with best IOA on 3D-MRI; median Conformity Index (CI) 0.74 for CT, 0.75 for 2D-MRI and 0.77 for 3D-MRI. IOA of MRI-defined GTVp week 0 was better compared to CT; CI 0.58 for CT, 0.62 for 2D-MRI and 0.7 for 3D-MRI. MRI-defined GTVp IOA week three was worse compared to week 0. Conclusions: Delineation on MRI results in smaller volumes and better IOA week 0 compared to CT. 3D-MRI provides the best IOA in CTV and GTVp. MRI-defined GTVp on images acquired week three showed worse IOA compared to week 0. This highlights the need for consensus guidelines in GTVp delineation on MRI during treatment course in the context of dose escalation MRI-guided rectal boost studies. Advances in knowledge: Optimal MRI sequences for CT/MRI simulation and MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy in rectal cancer have been defined.

scholarly journals Tumour ADC measurements in rectal cancer: effect of ROI methods on ADC values and interobserver variability

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (12) ◽  
pp. 2567-2574 ◽  
Author(s):  
Doenja M. J. Lambregts ◽  
Geerard L. Beets ◽  
Monique Maas ◽  
Luís Curvo-Semedo ◽  
Alfons G. H. Kessels ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Interobserver Variability ◽  
Adc Values

Diagnosis of invasion depth in early colorectal carcinoma by pit pattern analysis with magnifying endoscopy

2001 ◽  
Vol 13 (s1) ◽  
pp. S2-S5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinji Tanaka ◽  
Ken Haruma ◽  
Shinji Nagata ◽  
Shiro Oka ◽  
Kazuaki Chayama
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Carcinoma ◽  
Pattern Analysis ◽  
Magnifying Endoscopy ◽  
Pit Pattern ◽  
Invasion Depth ◽  
Early Colorectal Carcinoma

Surgery, Radio- and Chemo- therapy for Multimodal Treatment of Rectal Cancer

Swiss Surgery ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 256-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Link ◽  
Staib ◽  
Kornmann ◽  
Formentini ◽  
Schatz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Multimodal Treatment ◽  
Local Relapse ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Primary Tumors ◽  
Impact On Survival ◽  
Relapse Rates

The possibilities and results of multimodal treatment in rectal cancer were reviewed with respect to the results of surgical treatment only. Based on the results of 4 studies, reducing local relapse rates and increasing long term survival rates significantly, postoperative radiochemotherapy (RCT) + chemotherapy (CT) should remain the recommended standard for R0 resected UICC II and III rectal cancers. The addition of RT to adjuvant CT reduces local relapses without significant impact on survival (NSABP R-02). Vice versa, the addition of CT to RT or an improved CT in the RCT-concept prolongs survival. Preoperative neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) reduced local relapse rates in 9 studies, and extended survival in one study that evaluated all eligible patients. Preoperative RT reduced local relapse rates in addition to total mesorectal excision (TME) but did not extend survival. The preoperative RCT + CT downstages resectable and nonresectable tumors and induces a higher sphincter preservation rate. Phase III data justifying its routine use in all UICC II + III stages are not yet available. This treatment may be routinely applied in nonresectable primary tumors or local relapses. Preoperative RCT (or RT) may evolve as standard, if the patient selection is improved and postoperative morbidity and long term toxicity reduced. Intraoperative RT could be added to this concept or be used together with preoperative/postoperative RT at the same indications. Postoperative adjuvant RT reduced local relapses significantly in a single trial, and no impact on survival time is reported. Since postoperative RT is inferior to preoperative RT, this treatment cannot be recommended, if RT is chosen as a single treatment modality in adjunction to surgery. The results of local tumor excisions may be improved with pre- or postoperative RCT + CT. In the future, multimodal treatment of rectal cancer might be more effective, if individualized according to prognostic factors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document