Oncotarget

Research Papers:

Dynamic enhanced CT: is there a difference between liver metastases of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumor and adenocarcinoma

Yong Cui, Zhong-Wu Li, Xiao-Ting Li, Shun-Yu Gao, Ying Li, Jie Li, Hui-Ci Zhu, Lei Tang, Kun Cao and Ying-Shi Sun _

PDF  |  HTML  |  How to cite  |  Order a Reprint

Oncotarget. 2017; 8:108146-108155. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.22554

Metrics: PDF 735 views  |   HTML 1552 views  |   ?  


Abstract

Yong Cui1, Zhong-Wu Li2, Xiao-Ting Li1, Shun-Yu Gao1, Ying Li1, Jie Li3, Hui-Ci Zhu1, Lei Tang1, Kun Cao1 and Ying-Shi Sun1

1Department of Radiology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing 100142, China

2Department of Pathology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing 100142, China

3Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing 100142, China

Correspondence to:

Ying-Shi Sun, email: sys27@163.com

Keywords: gastroenteropancreas; neuroendocrine tumors; adenocarcinomas; computed tomography; differentiation

Abbreviations: GEP, Gastroenteropancreatic; NETs, Neuroendocrine tumors; CT, Computed tomography

Received: March 27, 2017    Accepted: June 18, 2017    Published: November 20, 2017

ABSTRACT

This study proposed to evaluate the feasibility of dynamic enhanced CT in differentiation of liver metastases of gastroenteropancreatic well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (GEP NETs) from GEP adenocarcinomas based on their characteristic features. CT images of 23 well-differentiated (G1 or G2) GEP NETs and 23 GEP adenocarcinomas patients with liver metastases were retrospectively reviewed. The distribution type, shape, intra-tumoral neovascularity, enhancement on hepatic artery phase, dynamic enhancement pattern and lymphadenopathy were subjective analyzed. Meanwhile, the size, number, CT value of tumor and adjacent normal liver parenchyma were measured and the metastasis-to-liver ratios were calculated objectively. Compared with GEP adenocarcinomas, the liver metastases of GEP NETs more frequently demonstrated a hyper enhancement on hepatic artery phase, washout dynamic enhancement pattern, absence of lymphadenopathy and higher metastasis-to-liver ratios on both hepatic artery phase and portal venous phase (P=0.017, P<0.001, P =0.038, P <0.001 and P =0.008, respectively). Logistic regression analysis showed that the dynamic enhancement pattern (P=0.012), and the metastasis-to-liver ratios on hepatic artery phase (P=0.009) were independent CT predictors for liver metastases of GEP NETs. The sensitivity and specificity of combing the two predictors in differentiation of liver metastases of GEP adenocarcinomas from GEP NET were 82.6% (19 of 23) and 91.3% (21 of 23), respectively. CT features are helpful in differentiating liver metastases of well-differentiated GEP NETs from that of GEP adenocarcinomas.


Creative Commons License All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
PII: 22554