0 332

Cited 7 times in

Retrospective Evaluation of Treatment Response in Patients with Nonmetastatic Pancreatic Cancer Using CT and CA 19-9

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author김승섭-
dc.contributor.author박미숙-
dc.contributor.author방승민-
dc.contributor.author이선영-
dc.contributor.author이희승-
dc.contributor.author한경화-
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-08T02:58:33Z-
dc.date.available2022-07-08T02:58:33Z-
dc.date.issued2022-06-
dc.identifier.issn0033-8419-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/188599-
dc.description.abstractBackground Imaging studies have limitations in evaluating pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treatment response. Purpose To investigate the effectiveness of combined CT and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) evaluation at 8 weeks after first-line treatment to predict overall survival (OS) of patients with nonmetastatic PDAC. Materials and Methods Patients with nonmetastatic PDAC who received first-line treatment with either chemotherapy or concurrent chemoradiation in a single-center PDAC cohort registry were retrospectively enrolled in the study between January 2013 and December 2016. Follow-up CT images obtained 8 weeks after treatment were evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Patients with partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) were defined as CT responders, and those with progressive disease (PD) were defined as CT nonresponders. Patients with a normalized CA 19-9 level at 8-week follow-up were defined as CA 19-9 responders, and those with a nonnormalized or nonelevated CA 19-9 level were defined as CA 19-9 nonresponders. OS was compared using the Kaplan-Meier method with Breslow analysis. Results A total of 197 patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 65 years ± 10; 107 men) were evaluated. Patients with PD (n = 17) showed shorter OS than those with SD (n = 147; P < .001) or PR (n = 33; P = .003). OS did not differ between the patients with PR and those with SD (P = .60). When the CT and CA 19-9 responses were integrated, OS was longest in CT and CA 19-9 responders (group 1, n = 27; median OS, 26.6 months [95% CI: 9.0, 44.1]), followed by CT responders but CA 19-9 nonresponders (group 2, n = 153; median OS, 15.9 months [95% CI: 13.3, 18.5]; P = .007 vs group 1) and CT and CA 19-9 nonresponders (group 3, n = 17; median OS, 6.5 months [95% CI: 0.8, 12.2]; P < .001 vs group 2). Conclusion Integrated evaluation with CT and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 response allowed more accurate stratification of survival in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the early treatment period than did evaluation according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityrestriction-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherRadiological Society of North America-
dc.relation.isPartOfRADIOLOGY-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.subject.MESHCA-19-9 Antigen / analysis*-
dc.subject.MESHCarbohydrates / therapeutic use-
dc.subject.MESHCarcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal* / diagnostic imaging-
dc.subject.MESHCarcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal* / drug therapy-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHMale-
dc.subject.MESHPancreatic Neoplasms* / diagnostic imaging-
dc.subject.MESHPancreatic Neoplasms* / drug therapy-
dc.subject.MESHRetrospective Studies-
dc.subject.MESHTomography, X-Ray Computed / methods-
dc.subject.MESHTreatment Outcome-
dc.titleRetrospective Evaluation of Treatment Response in Patients with Nonmetastatic Pancreatic Cancer Using CT and CA 19-9-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Radiology (영상의학교실)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSeung-Seob Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSunyoung Lee-
dc.contributor.googleauthorHee Seung Lee-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSeungmin Bang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKyunghwa Han-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMi-Suk Park-
dc.identifier.doi10.1148/radiol.212236-
dc.contributor.localIdA05097-
dc.contributor.localIdA01463-
dc.contributor.localIdA01786-
dc.contributor.localIdA05659-
dc.contributor.localIdA03349-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ02596-
dc.identifier.eissn1527-1315-
dc.identifier.pmid35258374-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.212236?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub++0pubmed&-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKim, Seung-seob-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor김승섭-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor박미숙-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor방승민-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor이선영-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor이희승-
dc.citation.volume303-
dc.citation.number3-
dc.citation.startPage548-
dc.citation.endPage556-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationRADIOLOGY, Vol.303(3) : 548-556, 2022-06-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Radiology (영상의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.