Cancer Imaging (Jan 2023)

Tumor size measurements of pancreatic cancer with neoadjuvant therapy based on RECIST guidelines: is MRI as effective as CT?

  • Panpan Yang,
  • Kuanzheng Mao,
  • Yisha Gao,
  • Zhen Wang,
  • Jun Wang,
  • Yufei Chen,
  • Chao Ma,
  • Yun Bian,
  • Chengwei Shao,
  • Jianping Lu

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-023-00528-z
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 23, no. 1
pp. 1 – 10

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Objectives To compare tumor size measurements using CT and MRI in pancreatic cancer (PC) patients with neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). Methods This study included 125 histologically confirmed PC patients who underwent NAT. The tumor sizes from CT and MRI before and after NAT were compared by using Bland–Altman analyses and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Variations in tumor size estimates between MRI and CT in relationship to different factors, including NAT methods (chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy), tumor locations (head/neck, body/tail), tumor regression grade (TRG) levels (0–2, 3), N stages (N0, N1/N2) and tumor resection margin status (R0, R1), were further analysed. The McNemar test was used to compare the efficacy of NAT evaluations based on the CT and MRI measurements according to RECIST 1.1 criteria. Results There was no significant difference between the median tumor sizes from CT and MRI before and after NAT (P = 0.44 and 0.39, respectively). There was excellent agreement in tumor size between MRI and CT, with mean size differences and limits of agreement (LOAs) of 1.5 [-9.6 to 12.7] mm and 0.9 [-12.6 to 14.5] mm before NAT (ICC, 0.93) and after NAT (ICC, 0.91), respectively. For all the investigated factors, there was good or excellent correlation (ICC, 0.76 to 0.95) for tumor sizes between CT and MRI. There was no significant difference in the efficacy evaluation of NAT between CT and MRI measurements (P = 1.0). Conclusion MRI and CT have similar performance in assessing PC tumor size before and after NAT.

Keywords