Affordable Access

Access to the full text

Amide Proton Transfer Weighted and Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Imaging in Evaluation of Prognostic Factors for Rectal Adenocarcinoma

  • Li, Juan1
  • Lin, Liangjie2
  • Gao, Xuemei1
  • Li, Shenglei3
  • Cheng, Jingliang1
  • 1 Department of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou , (China)
  • 2 Advanced Technical Support, Philips Healthcare, Beijing , (China)
  • 3 Department of Pathology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou , (China)
Published Article
Frontiers in Oncology
Frontiers Media SA
Publication Date
Jan 03, 2022
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.783544
  • Oncology
  • Original Research


Objectives To analyze the value of amide proton transfer (APT) weighted and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) imaging in evaluation of prognostic factors for rectal adenocarcinoma, compared with diffusion weighted imaging (DWI). Materials and Methods Preoperative pelvic MRI data of 110 patients with surgical pathologically confirmed diagnosis of rectal adenocarcinoma were retrospectively evaluated. All patients underwent high-resolution T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), APT, IVIM, and DWI. Parameters including APT signal intensity (APT SI), pure diffusion coefficient (D), pseudo-diffusion coefficient (D*), perfusion fraction (f), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) were measured in different histopathologic types, grades, stages, and structure invasion statuses. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy, and the corresponding area under the curves (AUCs) were calculated. Results APT SI, D and ADC values of rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma (MC) were significantly higher than those of rectal common adenocarcinoma (AC) ([3.192 ± 0.661%] vs. [2.333 ± 0.471%], [1.153 ± 0.238×10-3 mm2/s] vs. [0.792 ± 0.173×10-3 mm2/s], and [1.535 ± 0.203×10-3 mm2/s] vs. [0.986 ± 0.124×10-3 mm2/s], respectively; all P<0.001). In AC group, the APT SI and D values showed significant differences between low- and high-grade tumors ([2.226 ± 0.347%] vs. [2.668 ± 0.638%], and [0.842 ± 0.148×10-3 mm2/s] vs. [0.777 ± 0.178×10-3 mm2/s], respectively, both P<0.05). The D value had significant difference between positive and negative extramural vascular invasion (EMVI) tumors ([0.771 ± 0.175×10-3 mm2/s] vs. [0.858 ± 0.151×10-3 mm2/s], P<0.05). No significant difference of APT SI, D, D*, f or ADC was observed in different T stages, N stages, perineural and lymphovascular invasions (all P>0.05). The ROC curves showed that the AUCs of APT SI, D and ADC values for distinguishing MC from AC were 0.921, 0.893 and 0.995, respectively. The AUCs of APT SI and D values in distinguishing low- from high-grade AC were 0.737 and 0.663, respectively. The AUC of the D value for evaluating EMVI involvement was 0.646. Conclusion APT and IVIM were helpful to assess the prognostic factors related to rectal adenocarcinoma, including histopathological type, tumor grade and the EMVI status.

Report this publication


Seen <100 times