Combined value of apparent diffusion coefficient-standardized uptake value max in evaluation of post-treated locally advanced rectal cancer

Table 1 Summarizing table of mean values of standardized uptake value and apparent diffusion coefficient, before and after chemoradiation treatment, and their variation in the overall patients

Variable	Mean ± SD	P value (Wilcoxon paired)
SUV1	16.3 ± 8.6	< 0.0001
SUV2	4.5 ± 2.1
ΔSUV (%)	66.8 ± 20.4
ADC1	0.83 ± 0.15	< 0.0001
ADC2	1.33 ± 0.13
ΔADC (%)	60.2 ± 23.2

ADC: Apparent diffusion coefficient; SUV: Standardized uptake value.

Table 2 Responders (TRG1-2) vs non responders (TRG3-5)

Variable	Responders(Mean ± SD)	Not responders(Mean ± SD)	P value(Mann-Whitney U test)
SUV1	15.1 ± 8.0	19.5 ± 9.8	0.151
SUV2	3.6 ± 1.4	6.6 ± 2.1	0.0009
ΔSUV (%)	68.5 ± 23.2	62.8 ± 10.5	0.151
ADC1	0.88 ± 0.19	0.78 ± 0.09	0.076
ADC2	1.47 ± 0.22	1.19 ± 0.2	0.009
ΔADC(%)	72.6 ± 27.1	55.5 ± 18.5	0.0078

Mann-Whitney U test was used to calculate and compare obtained values between SUV1 and SUV2 and between ADC1 and ADC2. ADC: Apparent diffusion coefficient; SUV: Standardized uptake value.

Table 3 Overview of studies analysing mean standardized uptake value and delta standardized uptake value values of the rectal lesion for each PET/CT study

Ref.	No. of patients	Mean SUV 1	Mean SUV 2	Mean SUV 3	Sn (%)	Sp (%)	Late cut-off (%)	Sn (%)	Sp (%)	Delta SUV 1 R (%)	Delta SUV 1 NR (%)	Delta SUV 2 R (%)	Delta SUV 2 NR (%)
Bampo et al[31]	30	17.5		7.1								73.1	50.2
Cascini et al[24]	33	11.2	6	2.7	100	87				62	28
Guerra et al[46]	31	16.3	8.1	4.3	63.2	55.6	60	77.3	55.6	51	43.1	68.5	62.8
Hermann et al[26]	28	9.5	5.2	3.1	74	50	45	63	100
Janssen et al[25]	46	16.4	13
Lambrecht et al[28]	22				100	75	76	100	75	59	25	90	63
Rosenberg et al[27]	30	9.5	5.5	3.5	74	70	57.5	79	70	44.3	29.6	66	48.3
Shanmugan et al[29]	70	10.8		3.8			63	60	84			74	56
Sun et al[30]	35	14.7		7.9								57.8

R: Responders; NR: Non responders; SUV: Standardized uptake value; Sn: Sensibility; Sp: Specificity.

Table 4 Overview of studies analysing mean apparent diffusion coefficient and delta apparent diffusion coefficient values of the rectal lesion for each MR study

Ref.	n of patients	Pre ADC mean R	Pre ADC mean NR	Post ADC mean R	Post ADC mean NR	ROC curve (highest accuracy)
Ippolito et al[45]	30	0.88 ± 0.19	0.78 ± 0.09	1.47 ± 0.22	1.19 ± 0.20	1.28 (80%)
Kim et al[41]	34	0.90 ± 0.06	0.94 ± 0.03
Jung et al[37]	35	0.93 ± 0.09	1.03 ± 0.08	1.29 ± 0.13	1.18 ± 0.08	1.18 (77.1%)
Kim et al[6]	40			1.62 ± 0.36	1.04 ± 0.24	1.20 (85%)
Curvo Semedo et al[43]	50	1.07 ± 0.15	1.10 ± 0.19	1.39 ± 0.24	1.45 ± 0.28	1.41 (53%)
Ha et al[38]	100	0.59 ± 0.29	0.49 ± 0.22	1.33 ± 0.25	1.13 ± 0.32	1.20 (67%)
Genovesi[44]	28	1.01 ± 0.06	1.29 ± 0.02	1.79 ± 0.51	1.37 ± 0.43	29.5 (91.3%)
Cai et al[39]	15	0.659	0.885	0.713	1.027
Birlik et al[40]	43	0.66 ± 0.10	0.72 ± 0.14	1.22 ± 0.26	0.95 ± 0.20	1.20 (60%)

R: Responders; NR: Non responders; ADC: Apparent diffusion coefficient.