Copyright
©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. May 15, 2025; 17(5): 103809
Published online May 15, 2025. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v17.i5.103809
Published online May 15, 2025. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v17.i5.103809
Table 1 Comparison of demographic and clinical characteristics among rectal cancer patients by T stage, mean ± SD/n (%)
Group | Early-stage group (n = 72) | Late-stage group (n = 54) | t/χ² | P value |
Age (year) | 58.25 ± 10.32 | 59.46 ± 11.24 | 0.629 | 0.531 |
Sex | 0.382 | 0.537 | ||
Male | 42 (58.33) | 29 (53.70) | ||
Female | 30 (41.67) | 25 (46.30) | ||
BMI (kg/m²) | 23.45 ± 3.21 | 23.82 ± 3.15 | 0.643 | 0.521 |
KPS score | 85.62 ± 7.85 | 84.93 ± 8.12 | 0.483 | 0.630 |
Smoke | 0.295 | 0.587 | ||
Yes | 31 (43.06) | 26 (48.15) | ||
No | 41 (56.94) | 28 (51.85) | ||
Alcohol | 0.428 | 0.513 | ||
Yes | 28 (38.89) | 24 (44.44) | ||
No | 44 (61.11) | 30 (55.56) | ||
Hypertension | 0.317 | 0.573 | ||
Yes | 25 (34.72) | 22 (40.74) | ||
No | 47 (65.28) | 32 (59.26) | ||
Diabetes | 0.394 | 0.530 | ||
Yes | 18 (25.00) | 16 (29.63) | ||
No | 54 (75.00) | 38 (70.37) | ||
Family history | 0.273 | 0.601 | ||
Yes | 12 (16.67) | 11 (20.37) | ||
No | 60 (83.33) | 43 (79.63) | ||
Tumor location | 0.518 | 0.772 | ||
Upper section | 24 (33.33) | 16 (29.63) | ||
Middle section | 28 (38.89) | 24 (44.44) | ||
Lower section | 20 (27.78) | 14 (25.93) | ||
Differentiation degree | 1.386 | 0.239 | ||
Low differentiation | 25 (34.72) | 24 (44.44) | ||
Medium to high differentiation | 47 (65.28) | 30 (55.56) |
Table 2 Comparison of general information of rectal cancer patients, mean ± SD/n (%)
Group | Early-stage group (n = 49) | Late-stage group (n = 77) | t/χ² | P value |
Age (year) | 58.92 ± 10.85 | 58.63 ± 10.68 | 0.147 | 0.883 |
Sex | 0.286 | 0.593 | ||
Male | 29 (59.18) | 42 (54.55) | ||
Female | 20 (40.82) | 35 (45.45) | ||
BMI (kg/m²) | 23.56 ± 3.18 | 23.64 ± 3.20 | 0.138 | 0.891 |
KPS score | 85.12 ± 8.02 | 85.48 ± 7.92 | 0.252 | 0.801 |
Smoke | 0.317 | 0.573 | ||
Yes | 24 (48.98) | 33 (42.86) | ||
No | 25 (51.02) | 44 (57.14) | ||
Alcohol | 0.394 | 0.530 | ||
Yes | 22 (44.90) | 30 (38.96) | ||
No | 27 (55.10) | 47 (61.04) | ||
Hypertension | 0.273 | 0.601 | ||
Yes | 19 (38.78) | 28 (36.36) | ||
No | 30 (61.22) | 49 (63.64) | ||
Hypertension | 0.328 | 0.567 | ||
Yes | 14 (28.57) | 20 (25.97) | ||
No | 35 (71.43) | 57 (74.03) | ||
Family history | 0.295 | 0.587 | ||
Yes | 10 (20.41) | 13 (16.88) | ||
No | 39 (79.59) | 64 (83.12) | ||
Tumor location | 0.482 | 0.786 | ||
Upper section | 15 (30.61) | 25 (32.47) | ||
Middle section | 21 (42.86) | 31 (40.26) | ||
Lower section | 13 (26.53) | 21 (27.27) |
Table 3 Analysis of receiver operating characteristic curves
Evaluation factors | AUC | 95%CI | Threshold value | True positive rate | Selectivity | Yoden |
T installment | ||||||
Ktrans | 0.835 | 0.762-0.908 | 0.286 | 79.825 | 75.632 | 0.555 |
Ve | 0.812 | 0.736-0.888 | 0.375 | 77.234 | 73.521 | 0.508 |
DCE-MRI parameters | 0.892 | 0.832-0.952 | 0.462 | 85.763 | 81.924 | 0.677 |
Degree of differentiation | ||||||
Ktrans | 0.821 | 0.748-0.894 | 0.273 | 78.632 | 74.825 | 0.535 |
Ve | 0.803 | 0.728-0.878 | 0.362 | 76.523 | 72.934 | 0.495 |
DCE-MRI parameters | 0.883 | 0.821-0.945 | 0.453 | 84.925 | 80.763 | 0.657 |
Table 4 Analysis of receiver operating characteristic curves
Evaluation factors | AUC | 95%CI | Threshold | True positive rate | Selectivity | Yoden |
T installment | ||||||
CA19-9 | 0.812 | 0.736-0.888 | 37.253 | 78.523 | 73.465 | 0.520 |
CA125 | 0.798 | 0.723-0.873 | 32.864 | 76.352 | 71.923 | 0.483 |
DCE-MRI indicators and cancer markers | 0.923 | 0.865-0.981 | 0.526 | 89.734 | 85.623 | 0.754 |
Degree of differentiation | ||||||
CA19-9 | 0.803 | 0.728-0.878 | 35.921 | 77.462 | 72.845 | 0.503 |
CA125 | 0.785 | 0.711-0.859 | 31.532 | 75.283 | 70.942 | 0.462 |
DCE-MRI parameters + tumor markers | 0.912 | 0.855-0.969 | 0.512 | 88.653 | 84.372 | 0.730 |
Table 5 DeLong test results for the area under the curve of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging metrics and tumor biomarkers in differentiating T staging and degree of differentiation
Inspection results | Z-score | Significance level | AUC | Mean error | 95%CI |
T installment | |||||
CA19-9 and CA125 serum biomarkers | 0.862 | 0.389 | 0.014 | 0.016 | -0.018 to 0.046 |
CA19-9 alongside DCE-MRI measurements and cancer markers | 4.253 | < 0.05 | 0.111 | 0.026 | 0.060 to 0.162 |
CA125 in conjunction with DCE-MRI parameters and tumor markers | 4.682 | < 0.05 | 0.125 | 0.027 | 0.072 to 0.178 |
Degree of differentiation | |||||
CA19-9 and CA125 serum biomarkers | 0.923 | 0.356 | 0.018 | 0.020 | -0.021 to 0.057 |
CA19-9 alongside DCE-MRI measurements and cancer markers | 4.132 | < 0.05 | 0.109 | 0.026 | 0.058 to 0.160 |
CA125 in conjunction with DCE-MRI parameters and tumor markers | 4.521 | < 0.05 | 0.127 | 0.028 | 0.072 to 0.182 |
- Citation: Wang Q, Zhang XY, Yang JF, Tao YL. Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced-magnetic resonance imaging parameters and serum markers in preoperative rectal cancer evaluation: Combined diagnostic value. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2025; 17(5): 103809
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5204/full/v17/i5/103809.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4251/wjgo.v17.i5.103809