2018
DOI: 10.1007/s00261-018-1457-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0T for early assessment of tumor response in locally advanced rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation therapy

Abstract: ΔADC at 2 weeks after the beginning of CRT is a reliable tool to early assess treatment response.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
23
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
1
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Gynecological GEC-ESTRO Working Group gave recommendations for MRI-based adaptive target volume as well as for OARs (2). In addition, ADC values were considered a quantitative tool not only for diagnosis but also for the evaluation of treatment response in cervical cancer (19), as in other malignancies (20)(21)(22).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Gynecological GEC-ESTRO Working Group gave recommendations for MRI-based adaptive target volume as well as for OARs (2). In addition, ADC values were considered a quantitative tool not only for diagnosis but also for the evaluation of treatment response in cervical cancer (19), as in other malignancies (20)(21)(22).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The present study demonstrates that mean ADC values acquired from the primary tumours were significantly lower in EMVI (+) patients than in those without EMVI. Lower ADC values are expected in poorly differentiated tumours, and these tumours with low ADC values represent more aggressive behaviour [10,25]. Therewithal, ADC has been shown to be an indirect indicator of microvascular circulation [10,26].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When the measurements were >10% different between the two reviewers, another series of measurements was performed by the same two reviewers to reach a consensus. Differences ≤10% were considered negligible and the average was reported ( 23 ). Moreover, the data obtained by each observer were used to calculate the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the inter-observer agreement.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%