Prognostic value of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in uterine cervical cancer

16Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the prognostic value of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for predicting disease progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in cervical cancer. Materials and methods A total of 67 locally advanced cervical cancer patients who received CCRT underwent both DWI and PET/CT before and during (at 1 month) treatment. The mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADCmean) and maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) were measured on the tumor and the percentage changes between 2 time points (ΔADCmean and ΔSUVmax) were calculated. The ΔADCmean and ΔSUVmax were compared in terms of predicting disease progression after CCRT. Results During a mean follow-up of 2.7 years, disease progression was identified in 16 patients (23.9%). The ΔADCmean and ΔSUVmax were significantly correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient, 0.38; P = 0.002). For predicting disease progression, the integrated area under the curves of ΔADCmean (0.791) and ΔSUVmax (0.781) were not significantly different (P = 0.88). On multivariate analysis, both ΔADCmean and ΔSUVmax were the independent predictors of disease progression (hazard ratio, 7.9 and 8.7; P, 0.001 and <0.001, respectively). Conclusion The percentage changes of ADCmean and SUVmax during CCRT have a similar prognostic value for predicting disease progression after CCRT in cervical cancers.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Park, J. J., Kim, C. K., & Park, B. K. (2016). Prognostic value of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in uterine cervical cancer. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 120(3), 507–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2016.02.014

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free