USE OF INTEGRATED DIFFUSION-WEIGHTED MAGNETIC-RESONANCE IMAGING IN PRE-OPERATIVE EVALUATION OF RESECTABILITY OF ADVANCED OVARIAN CANCER

The aim of the study was to compare the diagnostic potential of integrated diffusion-weighted magnetic-resonance imaging (DW-MRI) with multi-spiral computed tomography (MSCT) in pre-operative evaluation of resectability of advanced ovarian cancer. Materials and methods. In the period from February to December 2016, 73 patients with suspected malignant neoplasms of the ovaries underwent preoperative examination, including abdominal/pelvic integrated DW-MRI or MSCT. The DW-MRI test was run using a 1,5 T scanner (b-factors of 0-1000 s/mm²) able to compute the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). For each of the two methods, we calculated the peritoneal cancer indices (PCI) and the informational values pertaining to the critical areas of the peritoneal cavity and the pelvis, and compared them with the surgical findings. We used the following criteria to conclude that a surgical intervention would not achieve the optimal cytoreduction: lesions of the omental bursa (> 1 cm); foci in the diaphragm area (> 2 cm); foci on the liver surface (> 2 cm); mesentery lesions of the small and/or large intestine (>1 cm); involvement of para-aortic lymph nodes; metastases to the parenchymal organs (liver, spleen) and the PCI > 20. Results. The sensitivity of DW-MRI vs MSCT was 78,3% vs 50%; and the specificity of DW-MRI vs MSCT was 78% vs 87%, respectively. The DW-MRI based prediction on the impossibility of effective surgical cytoreduction was correct in 92% of patients. The similar figure for MSCT was 64% of patients with inoperable tumors. Conclusion. DW-MRI is an accurate instrument for pre-operative assessment of the involvement of the peritoneum and abdominal organs in the tumor process. Based on this method, it is possible to develop a sensitive and specific algorithm for evaluating the resectability of ovarian cancer, thus avoiding unnecessary surgical intervention.

1. Siegel R.L., Miller K.D., Jemal A. Cancer statistics. 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015; 65 (1): 5-29.

2. Jayson G.C., Kohn E.C., Kitchener H.C., Ledermann J.A. Ovarian cancer. Lancet. 2014; 384 (9951): 1376-88.

3. Kandukuri S.R., Rao J. FIGO 2013 staging system for ovarian cancer: what is new in comparison to the 1988 staging system. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 27: 48-52.

4. Ledermann J.A., Raja F.A., Fotopoulou C., Gonzalez-Martin A., Colombo N., Sessa C. Newly diagnosed and relapsed epithelial ovarian carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow- up. Ann Oncol. 2013; 24 (Suppl 6): vi24-32.

5. Vergote I., Trope C.G., Amant F., Kristensen G.B., Ehlen T., Johnson N., Verheijen R.H. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary surgery in stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010; 363 (10): 943-53.

6. Winter W.E., Maxwell G.L, Tian C., Sundborg M.J., Rose G.S., Rose P.G., Rubin S.C., Muggia F., McGuire W.P. Tumor residual after surgical cytoreduction in prediction of clinical outcome in stage IV epithelial ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 83-9.

7. Chi D.S., Eisenhauer E.L., Lang J., Huh J., Haddad L., Abu Rustum N.R., Sonoda Y., Levine D.A., Hensley M., Barakat R.R. What is the optimal goal of primary cytoreductive surgery for bulky stage IIIC epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC)? Gynecol Oncol. 2006; 103 (2): 559-64.

8. Wimberger P., Lehmann N., Kimmig R., Burges A., Meier W., Hoppenau B., du Bois A. Prognostic factors for complete debulking in advanced ovarian cancer and its impact on survival. An exploratory analysis of a prospectively randomized phase III study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Ovarian Cancer Study Group (AGO- OVAR). Gynecol Oncol. 2007; 106 (1): 69-74.

9. Winter W.E., Maxwell G.L., Tian C., Carlson J.W., Ozols R.F., Rose P.G., Markman M., Armstrong D.K., Muggia F., McGuire W.P. Prognostic factors for stage III epithelial ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25 (24): 3621-7.

10. Rauh^ain J.A., Rodriguez N., Growdon W.B., Goodman A.K., Boruta D.M., Horowitz N.S., Del Carmen M.G., Schorge J.O. Primary debulking surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage IV ovarian cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012; 19 (3): 959-65.

11. Van Мeurs H.S., Tajik P., Hof M.H., Vergote I., Kenter G.G., Mol B.W., Buist M.R., Bossuyt P.M. Which patients benefit most from primary surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer? An exploratory analysis of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 55971 randomised trial. Eur J Cancer. 2013; 49 (15): 3191-201.

12. Forstner R., Sala E., Kinkel K., Spencer J.A. ESUR guidelines: ovarian cancer staging and follow-up. Eur Radiol. 2010; 20 (12): 2773-80.

13. Rockall A.G. Diffusion weighted MRI in ovarian cancer. Curr Opin Oncol. 2014; 26 (5): 529-35.

14. Suidan R.S., Ramirez P.T., Sarasohn D.M., Teitcher J.B., Mironov S., Iyer R.B. et al. A multicenter prospective trial evaluating the ability of preoperative computed tomography scan and serum CA-125 to predict suboptimal cytoreduction at primary debulking surgery for advanced ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2014; 134 (3): 455-61.

15. Sugarbaker P.H. Management of peritoneal surface malignancy using intraperitoneal chemotherapy and cytoreductive surgery. Michigan: Ludann Company, 1998.

16. Mizumoto A., Canbay E., Hirano M., Takao N., Matsuda T., Ichinose M., Yonemura Y. Morbidity and mortality outcomes of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy at a single institution in Japan. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2012; 2012: 836425.

17. Casado^dam A., Alderman R., Stuart O.A., Chang D., Sugarbaker P.H. Gastrointestinal complications in 147 consecutive patients with peritoneal surface malignancy treated by cytoreductive surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Int J Surg Oncol. 2011; 2011: 468698.

18. Heintz A.P., Hacker N.F., Berek J.S., Rose T., Munoz A., Lagasse L. Cytoreductive surgery in ovarian carcinoma: feasibility and mortality. Obstet Gynecol. 1986; 67 (Suppl 6): 783-8.

19. Farias-Eisner R., Teng F., Oliveira M., Leuchter R., Karlan B., Lagasse L.D. et al. The influence of tumor grade, distribution, and extent of carcinomatosis in minimal residual stage III epithelial ovarian cancer after optimal primary cytoreductive surgery. Gynecol Oncol. 1994; 55 (1): 108-10.

20. Nelson B.E., Rosenfield A.T., Schwartz P.E. Preoperative abdominopelvic computed tomographic prediction of optimal cytoreduction in epithelial ovarian carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 1993; 11 (1): 166-72.

21. Axtell A.E., Lee M.H., Bristow R.E., Dowdy S.C., Cliby W.A., Raman S. et al. Multi-institutional reciprocal validation study of computed tomography predictors of suboptimal primary cytoreduction in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25 (4): 384-9.

22. Low R.N., Barone R.M. Combined diffusion- weighted and gadolinium-enhanced MRI can accurately predict the peritoneal cancer index preoperatively in patients being considered for cytoreductive surgical procedures. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012; 19 (5): 1394-1401.

23. Low R.N., Barone R.M., Lucero J. Comparison of MRI and CT for predicting the Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) preoperatively in patients being considered for cytoreductive surgical procedures. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015; 22 (5): 1708-15.

24. Michielsen K., Vergote I., Op de 8eeck K., Amant F., Leunen K., Moerman P. et al. Whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted sequence for staging of patients with suspected ovarian cancer: a clinical feasibility study in comparison to CT and FDG-PET/CT. Eur Radiol. 2014; 24 (4): 889-901.

25. Espada M., Garcia-flores J.R., Jimenez M., Alvarez-Moreno E. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of intra-abdominal sites of implants to predict likelihood of suboptimal cytoreductive surgery in patients with ovarian carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2013; 23 (9): 2636-42.