Mayr N A, Yuh W T, Zheng J, Ehrhardt J C, Sorosky J I, Magnotta V A, Pelsang R E, Hussey D H
Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Iowa College of Medicine, Iowa City 52242, USA.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997 Sep 1;39(2):395-404. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(97)00318-0.
Tumor size estimated by pelvic examination (PE) is an important prognostic factor in cervical cancer treated with radiation therapy (RT). Recent histologic correlation studies also showed that magnetic resonance (MR) imaging provides highly accurate measurements of the actual tumor volume. The purpose of this study was to: (a) compare the accuracy of PE and MR in predicting outcome, and (b) correlate tumor measurements by PE versus MR.
Tumor measurements were performed prospectively in 43 patients with advanced cervical cancer. MR and PE were performed at the same time intervals: (a) at the start of RT, (b) after 20-24 Gy/2-2.5 weeks, (c) after 40-50 Gy/4-5 weeks, and (d) at follow-up (1-2 months after RT completion). PE measured tumor diameters in anteroposterior, lateral, and craniocaudal direction, and PE-derived tumor size was computed as maximum diameter, average diameter, and ellipsoid volume. MR-derived tumor size was calculated by summation of the tumor areas in each section and multiplication by the section thickness. Tumor regression during RT was calculated for each method as percentage of initial volume. The measurements were correlated with local failure and disease-free survival. Median follow-up was 29 months (range: 9-56 months).
Prediction of local control: Overall, tumor regression rate (rapid versus slow) was more precise than the initial tumor size in the prediction of outcome. MR provided a more accurate and earlier prediction of local control (at 2-2.5 weeks, and at 4-5 weeks of RT) than PE (only at follow-up). Based on the initial tumor size, MR was also better than PE in predicting disease-free survival and local control, particularly in large (> or = 100 cm3) tumors. Size correlation: Tumor size (maximum diameter, average diameter, volume) by PE and MR did not correlate well (r = 0.51, 0.61, and 0.58, respectively). When using MR measurements as a reference, PE tended to overestimate intermediate-size (40-99 cm3) tumors.
This preliminary study suggests that increased precision of tumor volume measurement leads to more accurate and earlier prediction of outcome in cervical cancer. MR tumor volumetry may be useful as an adjunct to PE in selected cases, and holds the potential to impact therapeutic decision-making.
盆腔检查(PE)所估计的肿瘤大小是接受放射治疗(RT)的宫颈癌的一个重要预后因素。近期的组织学相关性研究还表明,磁共振(MR)成像能够对实际肿瘤体积进行高度精确的测量。本研究的目的是:(a)比较PE和MR在预测预后方面的准确性,以及(b)对比PE与MR所测得的肿瘤大小。
对43例晚期宫颈癌患者进行前瞻性肿瘤测量。MR和PE在相同的时间间隔进行:(a)在放疗开始时,(b)在20 - 24 Gy/2 - 2.5周后,(c)在40 - 50 Gy/4 - 5周后,以及(d)在随访时(放疗结束后1 - 2个月)。PE测量肿瘤在前后、左右和头脚方向的直径,PE得出的肿瘤大小通过最大直径、平均直径和椭球体体积来计算。MR得出的肿瘤大小通过各层面肿瘤面积之和乘以层面厚度来计算。放疗期间每种方法的肿瘤退缩率按初始体积的百分比计算。这些测量与局部复发和无病生存率相关。中位随访时间为29个月(范围:9 - 56个月)。
局部控制的预测:总体而言?肿瘤退缩率(快与慢)在预后预测中比初始肿瘤大小更精确。MR在预测局部控制方面(在放疗2 - 2.5周时以及4 - 5周时)比PE(仅在随访时)更准确且更早。基于初始肿瘤大小,MR在预测无病生存率和局部控制方面也比PE更好,尤其是在大肿瘤(≥100 cm³)中。大小相关性:PE和MR所测的肿瘤大小(最大直径、平均直径、体积)相关性不佳(分别为r = 0.51、0.61和0.58)。以MR测量值为参考时,PE往往高估中等大小(40 - 99 cm³)的肿瘤。
这项初步研究表明,肿瘤体积测量精度的提高能更准确且更早地预测宫颈癌的预后。在某些特定病例中,MR肿瘤体积测定作为PE的辅助手段可能有用,并有可能影响治疗决策。