Diagnostic performance of node-RADS classification for primary lymph node assessment in rectal cancer: a modality benchmarking study.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Li Jiang, Zijian Zhuang, Xi Tang, Fugang Zhang, Haitao Zhu, Xuewen Xu, Dongqing Wang, Lirong Zhang
{"title":"Diagnostic performance of node-RADS classification for primary lymph node assessment in rectal cancer: a modality benchmarking study.","authors":"Li Jiang, Zijian Zhuang, Xi Tang, Fugang Zhang, Haitao Zhu, Xuewen Xu, Dongqing Wang, Lirong Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s00432-025-06196-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate how well the Node Reporting and Data System (Node-RADS) diagnoses lymph node involvement (LNI) in the initial stages of rectal cancer, utilizing contrast-enhanced CT (CE-CT), T2-weighted MRI (T2WI) and contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI (T1CE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 113 rectal cancer patients who underwent radical surgery without neoadjuvant therapy. Two radiologists independently assessed regional lymph nodes using the highest NODE-RADS classification and histopathology as reference criteria. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using the McNemar test with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Node-RADS showed improved diagnostic performance over short-axis diameter (SAD) in all modalities (AUC: 0.838 vs. 0.744 for CE-CT, 0.845 vs. 0.747 for T2WI, 0.853 vs. 0.786 for T1CE; all P < 0.05). The sensitivity and specificity of Node-RADS across three modalities ranged from 76.19 - 78.57% and 91.55 - 92.96%, respectively. Pairwise comparisons of sensitivity and specificity among the three modalities showed no significant differences after Bonferroni correction (all McNemar test P = 1.0). There was no significant difference in Node-RADS performance among the three modalities (all P > 0.05). The weighted kappa values were 0.742-0.798.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Node-RADS demonstrated superior diagnostic performance over SAD measurements and similar diagnostic effectiveness in assessing LNI for primary rectal cancer stages across CE-CT, T2WI, and T1CE.</p>","PeriodicalId":15118,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology","volume":"151 4","pages":"145"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12009234/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-025-06196-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate how well the Node Reporting and Data System (Node-RADS) diagnoses lymph node involvement (LNI) in the initial stages of rectal cancer, utilizing contrast-enhanced CT (CE-CT), T2-weighted MRI (T2WI) and contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI (T1CE).

Methods: This retrospective study included 113 rectal cancer patients who underwent radical surgery without neoadjuvant therapy. Two radiologists independently assessed regional lymph nodes using the highest NODE-RADS classification and histopathology as reference criteria. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using the McNemar test with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.

Results: Node-RADS showed improved diagnostic performance over short-axis diameter (SAD) in all modalities (AUC: 0.838 vs. 0.744 for CE-CT, 0.845 vs. 0.747 for T2WI, 0.853 vs. 0.786 for T1CE; all P < 0.05). The sensitivity and specificity of Node-RADS across three modalities ranged from 76.19 - 78.57% and 91.55 - 92.96%, respectively. Pairwise comparisons of sensitivity and specificity among the three modalities showed no significant differences after Bonferroni correction (all McNemar test P = 1.0). There was no significant difference in Node-RADS performance among the three modalities (all P > 0.05). The weighted kappa values were 0.742-0.798.

Conclusion: Node-RADS demonstrated superior diagnostic performance over SAD measurements and similar diagnostic effectiveness in assessing LNI for primary rectal cancer stages across CE-CT, T2WI, and T1CE.

淋巴结- rads分类在直肠癌原发性淋巴结评估中的诊断性能:一项模式基准研究。
目的:通过对比增强CT (CE-CT)、t2加权MRI (T2WI)和对比增强t1加权MRI (T1CE),评估淋巴结报告和数据系统(Node- rads)在直肠癌初始阶段诊断淋巴结累及(LNI)的效果。方法:回顾性研究113例直肠癌患者行根治性手术,未接受新辅助治疗。两名放射科医生使用最高的NODE-RADS分类和组织病理学作为参考标准独立评估区域淋巴结。采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析评价诊断效果。统计分析采用McNemar检验,多重比较采用Bonferroni校正。结果:节点- rads在所有模式下对短轴直径(SAD)的诊断性能均有改善(AUC: 0.838 vs. 0.744 CE-CT, 0.845 vs. 0.747 T2WI, 0.853 vs. 0.786 T1CE;P < 0.05)。加权kappa值为0.742 ~ 0.798。结论:Node-RADS在通过CE-CT、T2WI和T1CE评估原发性直肠癌分期的LNI方面表现出优于SAD测量的诊断效果,并且具有相似的诊断效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
2.80%
发文量
577
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The "Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology" publishes significant and up-to-date articles within the fields of experimental and clinical oncology. The journal, which is chiefly devoted to Original papers, also includes Reviews as well as Editorials and Guest editorials on current, controversial topics. The section Letters to the editors provides a forum for a rapid exchange of comments and information concerning previously published papers and topics of current interest. Meeting reports provide current information on the latest results presented at important congresses. The following fields are covered: carcinogenesis - etiology, mechanisms; molecular biology; recent developments in tumor therapy; general diagnosis; laboratory diagnosis; diagnostic and experimental pathology; oncologic surgery; and epidemiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信