Mu RQ, Lv JW, Ma CY, Ma XH, Xing D, Ma HS. Diagnostic performance of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging parameters and serum tumor markers in rectal carcinoma prognosis. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2024; 16(5): 1796-1807 [PMID: 38764818 DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v16.i5.1796]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Hou-Sheng Ma, BMed, Doctor, Department of Radiology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, No. 20 Yuhuangding East Road, Zhifu District, Yantai 264000, Shandong Province, China. mahousheng1971@163.com
Research Domain of This Article
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging
Article-Type of This Article
Retrospective Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Gastrointest Oncol. May 15, 2024; 16(5): 1796-1807 Published online May 15, 2024. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v16.i5.1796
Table 1 Comparison of baseline data of rectal carcinoma patients with different T stages
Factors
Low stage group (n = 62)
High stage group (n = 42)
P value
Age (yr)
0.474
≥ 60
34
26
< 60
28
16
Sex
0.636
Male
34
25
Female
28
17
BMI (kg/m2)
0.755
≥ 25
16
12
< 25
46
30
Tumor site
0.991
Upper
21
14
Middle
17
12
Lower
24
16
Tumor type
0.854
Protruded
8
7
Ulcerative
44
29
Infiltrating
10
6
Differentiation degree
0.786
Moderate-high differentiation
40
26
Low differentiation
22
16
Table 2 Comparison of baseline data of patients with different differentiation degrees
Factors
M + H group (n = 66)
L group (n = 38)
P value
Age (yr)
0.703
≥ 60
39
21
< 60
27
17
Sex
0.855
Male
37
22
Female
29
16
BMI (kg/m2)
0.572
≥ 25
19
9
< 25
47
29
Tumor site
1.069
Upper
23
12
Middle
20
9
Lower
23
17
Tumor type
0.797
Protruded
10
5
Ulcerative
47
26
Infiltrating
9
7
T staging
0.786
T1-T2
40
22
T3-T4
26
16
Table 3 Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of various parameters
Diagnostic variable
AUC
95%CI
Cut-off
Sensitivity
Specificity
Youden index
T stage
Ktrans
0.638
0.532-0.745
0.26
62.90%
59.52%
22.43%
Ve
0.695
0.595-0.794
0.45
40.32%
92.86%
33.18%
DCE-MRI parameters
0.742
0.646-0.837
0.68
53.23%
92.86%
46.08%
Differentiation degree
Ktrans
0.672
0.549-0.795
0.29
87.88%
57.90%
45.77%
Ve
0.725
0.626-0.824
0.49
75.76%
63.16%
38.92%
DCE-MRI parameters
0.769
0.677-0.861
0.35
78.79%
65.79%
44.58%
Table 4 Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of various parameters
Diagnostic variable
AUC
95%CI
Cut-off
Sensitivity
Specificity
Youden index
T stage
CA19-9
0.773
0.684-0.863
23.63
53.23%
100.00%
53.23%
CA125
0.802
0.716-0.888
66.90
67.74%
90.48%
58.22%
DCE-MRI parameters + tumor markers
0.836
0.756-0.916
0.93
72.58%
95.24%
67.82%
Differentiation degree
CA19-9
0.834
0.758-0.909
27.49
81.82%
68.42%
50.24%
CA125
0.796
0.711-0.881
66.82
62.12%
89.47%
51.60%
DCE-MRI parameters + tumor markers
0.946
0.903-0.990
0.76
87.88%
97.37%
85.25%
Table 5 Delong test of the areas under the curve of DCE-MRI parameters and tumor markers in distinguishing T staging and differentiated degree
Test results
Z value
P value
Difference in AUC
Standard error difference
95%CI
Lower bound
Upper bound
T stage
CA199-CA125
-1.452
0.146
-0.029
0.293
-0.068
0.01
CA199 - DCE-MRI parameters + tumor markers
7.616
< 0.001
0.609
0.299
0.453
0.766
CA125- DCE-MRI parameters + tumor markers
7.856
< 0.001
0.638
0.296
0.479
0.797
Differentiation degree
CA199-CA125
0.617
0.537
0.038
0.287
-0.082
0.157
CA199- DCE-MRI parameters + tumor markers
14.913
< 0.001
0.780
0.248
0.677
0.882
CA125- DCE-MRI parameters + tumor markers
13.382
< 0.001
0.742
0.257
0.633
0.851
Citation: Mu RQ, Lv JW, Ma CY, Ma XH, Xing D, Ma HS. Diagnostic performance of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging parameters and serum tumor markers in rectal carcinoma prognosis. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2024; 16(5): 1796-1807