评价基于mri的肿瘤消退等级(mrTRG)客观评分和评价局部晚期直肠癌治疗反应的主观李克特评分——一项回顾性研究

IF 0.9 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging Pub Date : 2023-09-12 DOI:10.1055/s-0043-1772695
Aparna N. Katdare, Akshay D. Baheti, Sayali Y. Pangarkar, Kunal A. Mistry, Suman K. Ankathi, Purvi D. Haria, Amit J. Choudhari, Amrita Guha, Kunal Gala, Nitin Shetty, Suyash Kulkarni, Mukta Ramadwar, Munita Bal
{"title":"评价基于mri的肿瘤消退等级(mrTRG)客观评分和评价局部晚期直肠癌治疗反应的主观李克特评分——一项回顾性研究","authors":"Aparna N. Katdare, Akshay D. Baheti, Sayali Y. Pangarkar, Kunal A. Mistry, Suman K. Ankathi, Purvi D. Haria, Amit J. Choudhari, Amrita Guha, Kunal Gala, Nitin Shetty, Suyash Kulkarni, Mukta Ramadwar, Munita Bal","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1772695","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Purpose: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with the help of MRI-based tumor regression grade (mrTRG) score has been used as a tool to predict pathological tumor regression grade (pTRG) in patients of rectal cancer post-neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Our study aims to evaluate the ability of MRI in assessing treatment response comparing an objective mrTRG score and a subjective Likert score, with a focus on the ability to predict pathologic complete response (pCR). Methods: Post-treatment MRI studies were retrospectively reviewed for 170 consecutive cases of histopathologically proven rectal cancer after receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation and prior to surgery by two oncoradiologists blinded to the eventual postoperative histopathology findings. An objective (mrTRG) and a subjective Likert score were assigned to all the cases. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to determine the ability of Likert scale and mrTRG to predict pCR, with postoperative histopathology being the gold standard. The optimal cutoff points on the scale of 1 to 5 were obtained for mrTRG and Likert scale with the greatest sum of sensitivity and specificity using the Youden Index. Results: The most accurate cutoff point for the mrTRG to predict complete response was 2.5 (using Youden index), with a sensitivity of 69.2%, specificity of 69.6%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 85.6%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 46.4%, and accuracy of 69.3%. The most accurate cutoff for the Likert scale to predict complete response was 3.5, with a sensitivity of 47.5%, specificity of 89.1%, PPV of 91.9%, NPV of 39.4%, and accuracy of 59%. mrTRG had a lower cutoff and was more accurate in predicting pCR compared to Likert score. Conclusion: An objective mrTRG was more accurate than a subjective Likert scale to predict complete response in our study.","PeriodicalId":51597,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of an Objective MRI-Based Tumor Regression Grade (mrTRG) Score and a Subjective Likert Score for Assessing Treatment Response in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancers—A Retrospective Study\",\"authors\":\"Aparna N. Katdare, Akshay D. Baheti, Sayali Y. Pangarkar, Kunal A. Mistry, Suman K. Ankathi, Purvi D. Haria, Amit J. Choudhari, Amrita Guha, Kunal Gala, Nitin Shetty, Suyash Kulkarni, Mukta Ramadwar, Munita Bal\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0043-1772695\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Purpose: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with the help of MRI-based tumor regression grade (mrTRG) score has been used as a tool to predict pathological tumor regression grade (pTRG) in patients of rectal cancer post-neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Our study aims to evaluate the ability of MRI in assessing treatment response comparing an objective mrTRG score and a subjective Likert score, with a focus on the ability to predict pathologic complete response (pCR). Methods: Post-treatment MRI studies were retrospectively reviewed for 170 consecutive cases of histopathologically proven rectal cancer after receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation and prior to surgery by two oncoradiologists blinded to the eventual postoperative histopathology findings. An objective (mrTRG) and a subjective Likert score were assigned to all the cases. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to determine the ability of Likert scale and mrTRG to predict pCR, with postoperative histopathology being the gold standard. The optimal cutoff points on the scale of 1 to 5 were obtained for mrTRG and Likert scale with the greatest sum of sensitivity and specificity using the Youden Index. Results: The most accurate cutoff point for the mrTRG to predict complete response was 2.5 (using Youden index), with a sensitivity of 69.2%, specificity of 69.6%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 85.6%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 46.4%, and accuracy of 69.3%. The most accurate cutoff for the Likert scale to predict complete response was 3.5, with a sensitivity of 47.5%, specificity of 89.1%, PPV of 91.9%, NPV of 39.4%, and accuracy of 59%. mrTRG had a lower cutoff and was more accurate in predicting pCR compared to Likert score. Conclusion: An objective mrTRG was more accurate than a subjective Likert scale to predict complete response in our study.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51597,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1772695\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1772695","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要目的:磁共振成像(MRI)结合基于MRI的肿瘤消退分级(mrTRG)评分作为预测直肠癌新辅助放化疗后患者病理性肿瘤消退分级(pTRG)的工具。我们的研究旨在通过比较客观的mrTRG评分和主观的Likert评分来评估MRI评估治疗反应的能力,重点是预测病理完全反应(pCR)的能力。方法:回顾性回顾170例连续的经组织病理学证实的直肠癌患者在接受新辅助放化疗后和术前的MRI研究,由两名对最终的术后组织病理学结果不知情的肿瘤科医生进行。对所有病例进行客观(mrTRG)和主观李克特评分。构建受试者工作特征曲线,以术后组织病理学为金标准,确定Likert量表和mrTRG预测pCR的能力。利用约登指数(Youden Index), mrTRG和Likert量表在1 ~ 5的范围内获得敏感性和特异性之和最大的最佳截断点。结果:mrTRG预测完全缓解最准确的截断点为2.5(使用约登指数),敏感性为69.2%,特异性为69.6%,阳性预测值(PPV)为85.6%,阴性预测值(NPV)为46.4%,准确率为69.3%。李克特量表预测完全缓解的最准确临界值为3.5,敏感性为47.5%,特异性为89.1%,PPV为91.9%,NPV为39.4%,准确性为59%。与李克特评分相比,mrTRG具有更低的临界值,并且在预测pCR方面更准确。结论:在我们的研究中,客观mrTRG比主观李克特量表更准确地预测完全反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of an Objective MRI-Based Tumor Regression Grade (mrTRG) Score and a Subjective Likert Score for Assessing Treatment Response in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancers—A Retrospective Study
Abstract Purpose: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with the help of MRI-based tumor regression grade (mrTRG) score has been used as a tool to predict pathological tumor regression grade (pTRG) in patients of rectal cancer post-neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Our study aims to evaluate the ability of MRI in assessing treatment response comparing an objective mrTRG score and a subjective Likert score, with a focus on the ability to predict pathologic complete response (pCR). Methods: Post-treatment MRI studies were retrospectively reviewed for 170 consecutive cases of histopathologically proven rectal cancer after receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation and prior to surgery by two oncoradiologists blinded to the eventual postoperative histopathology findings. An objective (mrTRG) and a subjective Likert score were assigned to all the cases. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to determine the ability of Likert scale and mrTRG to predict pCR, with postoperative histopathology being the gold standard. The optimal cutoff points on the scale of 1 to 5 were obtained for mrTRG and Likert scale with the greatest sum of sensitivity and specificity using the Youden Index. Results: The most accurate cutoff point for the mrTRG to predict complete response was 2.5 (using Youden index), with a sensitivity of 69.2%, specificity of 69.6%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 85.6%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 46.4%, and accuracy of 69.3%. The most accurate cutoff for the Likert scale to predict complete response was 3.5, with a sensitivity of 47.5%, specificity of 89.1%, PPV of 91.9%, NPV of 39.4%, and accuracy of 59%. mrTRG had a lower cutoff and was more accurate in predicting pCR compared to Likert score. Conclusion: An objective mrTRG was more accurate than a subjective Likert scale to predict complete response in our study.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging
Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
45 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
A Reflection of Our Role as Radiologists in India's Current Landscape of Infectious Diseases. Multimodality Imaging in the Diagnosis and Staging of Gestational Choriocarcinoma Rare Presentations of Takayasu Arteritis: A Case Series Sonographic Assessment of Isthmocele and Its Obstetric Complications in Subsequent Pregnancies: A Pictorial Review Exploring Radiology Postgraduate Students' Engagement with Large Language Models for Educational Purposes: A Study of Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1