Measurement of circumferential tumor extent of colorectal cancer on CT colonography: relation to clinicopathological features and patient prognosis after surgery

Radiologic T staging of colon cancer: renewed interest for clinical practice

Radiologic imaging, especially MRI, has long been the mainstay for rectal cancer staging and patient selection for neoadjuvant therapy prior to surgical resection. In contrast, colonoscopy and CT have been the standard for colon cancer diagnosis and metastasis staging with T and N staging often performed at the time of surgical resection. With recent clinical trials exploring the expansion of the use of neoadjuvant therapy beyond the anorectum to the remainder of the colon, the current and future state of colon cancer treatment is evolving with a renewed interest in evaluating the role radiology may play in the primary T staging of colon cancer. The performance of CT, CT colonography, MRI, and FDG PET-CT for colon cancer staging will be reviewed. N staging will also be briefly discussed. It is expected that accurate radiologic T staging will significantly impact future clinical decisions regarding the neoadjuvant versus surgical management of colon cancer.

A Predictive Model to Evaluate Pathologic Complete Response in Rectal Adenocarcinoma

Introduction: Neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (nCRT) before surgery was a standard treatment strategy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between the predictive factors and pathological complete response (pCR) in rectal cancer patients, especially in ultra-low ones. Method: A total of 402 patients were involved in this retrospective study. The logistic regression analyses were used to compare the different subgroups in univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine the independent predictive factors of pCR by using a logistic regression model. Results: A total of 402 patients received preoperative CRT. In all patients, multivariate analysis revealed that circumferential tumor extent rate (CER) (≤ 2/3cycle vs >2/3 cycle, P < .001, OR = 4.834, 95% CI: 2.309-10.121), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level (both ≤ 5 vs pre > 5 and post ≤ 5 vs both > 5, P = .033, OR = 1.537, 95% CI: 1.035-2.281), and interval time between the end of CRT and surgery (P = .031, OR = 2.412, 95% CI: 1.086-5.358) were predictive factors for pCR. The area under the curve (AUC) of the predictive model was 0.709 (95% CI: 0.649-0.769), which was significantly higher than the CER (0.646, 95% CI: 0.584-0.709), interval time (0.563, 95% CI: 0.495-0.631) and CEA level (0.586, 95% CI: 0.518-0.655). In ultra-low rectal patients, multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that CER (≤ 2/3 cycle vs > 2/3 cycle, P = .003, OR = 7.203, 95% CI: 1.934-26.823) and mismatch repair (MMR) status (pMMR vs dMMR, P = .016, OR = 0.173, 95% CI: 0.041-0.720) were predictive factors for pCR. The AUC of the predictive model was 0.653 (95% CI: 0.474-0.832). Conclusion: New predictive models were varied by the histologic types and MMR statuses to evaluate the trend of tumor response to nCRT in all RC cases and ultra-low RC patients, which may be used to individualize stratify for selected LARC patients.

Diagnostic accuracy of ultra-low-dose CT colonography for the detection of colorectal polyps: a feasibility study

PURPOSE

The aim of this feasibility study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ultra-low-dose CT colonography using iterative reconstruction algorithms with reference to standard colonoscopy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prior to this study, a phantom study was performed to investigate the optimal protocol for ultra-low-dose CT colonography. A total of 206 patients with average/high risk of colorectal cancer were recruited. After undergoing full bowel preparation, the patients were scanned in the prone and supine positions with the CT conditions set to 120 kV, standard deviation 45 to 50, and an adaptive iterative reconstruction algorithm applied. Two expert readers read the images independently. The main outcome measures were the per-patient and per-polyp accuracies for the detection of polyps ≥ 10 mm, with colonoscopy results as the reference standard.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients (102 females, mean age 67.5 years) underwent both ultra-low-dose CT colonography and colonoscopy on the same day. The mean radiation exposure dose was 0.64 ± 0.34 mSv. On colonoscopy, 39 patients had 45 polyps ≥ 10 mm (non-polypoid morphology 7), including 4 cancers. Per-patient sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CT colonography for polyps ≥ 10 mm were 0.74, 0.96, and 0.92 for reader one, and 0.74, 0.99, and 0.94 for reader two, respectively. Per-polyp sensitivities for polyps ≥ 10 mm were 0.73 for reader one and 0.71 for reader two. On subgroup analysis by morphology, non-polypoid polyps ≥ 10 mm were not detected by both readers.

CONCLUSION

Extreme ultra-low-dose CT colonography had an insufficient diagnostic performance for the detection of polyps ≥ 10 mm, because it was unable to detect non-polypoid polyps. This study showed that the problem with ultra-low-dose CT colonography was the lack of detectability of small-size polyps, especially non-polypoid polyps. To use ultra-low-dose CT colonography clinically, it is necessary to resolve the problems identified by this study.