Cancer Imaging (May 2023)
Post-neoadjuvant treatment pancreatic cancer resectability and outcome prediction using CT, 18F-FDG PET/MRI and CA 19–9
Abstract
Abstract Background CT prediction of resectability and prognosis following neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains challenging. This study aims to determine whether addition of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) postiron emission tomography (PET)/MRI and carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19–9 to contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) can improve accuracy of predicting resectability compared to CECT alone and predict prognosis in PDAC patients after NAT. Methods In this retrospective study, 120 PDAC patients (65 women; mean age, 66.7 years [standard deviation, 8.4]) underwent CECT, PET/MRI, and CA 19–9 examinations after NAT between January 2013 and June 2021. Three board-certified radiologists independently rated the overall resectability on a 5-point scale (score 5, definitely resectable) in three sessions (session 1, CECT; 2, CECT plus PET/MRI─no FDG avidity and no diffusion restriction at tumor-vessel contact indicated modification of CECT scores to ≥ 3; 3, CECT plus PET plus CA 19–9─no FDG avidity at tumor-vessel contact and normalized CA 19–9 indicated modification of CECT scores to ≥ 3). Jackknife free-response receiver operating characteristic method and generalized estimating equations were used to compare pooled area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of three sessions. Predictors for recurrence-free survival (RFS) were assessed using Cox regression analyses. Results Each session showed different pooled AUC (session 1 vs. 2 vs. 3, 0.853 vs. 0.873 vs. 0.874, p = 0.026), sensitivity (66.2% [137/207] vs. 86.0% [178/207] vs. 84.5% [175/207], p < 0.001) and specificity (67.3% [103/153] vs. 58.8% [90/153] vs. 60.1% [92/153], p = 0.048). According to pairwise comparison, specificity of CECT plus PET/MRI was lower than that of CECT alone (adjusted p = 0.042), while there was no significant difference in specificity between CECT alone and CECT plus PET plus CA 19–9 (adjusted p = 0.081). Twenty-eight of 69 patients (40.6%) with R0 resection experienced tumor recurrence (mean follow-up, 18.0 months). FDG avidity at tumor-vessel contact on post-NAT PET (HR = 4.37, p = 0.033) and pathologically confirmed vascular invasion (HR = 5.36, p = 0.004) predicted RFS. Conclusion Combination of CECT, PET and CA 19–9 increased area under the curve and sensitivity for determining resectability, compared to CECT alone, without compromising the specificity. Furthermore, 18F-FDG avidity at tumor-vessel contact on post-NAT PET predicted RFS.
Keywords
