Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Apr 25.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-025-11601-5. Online ahead of print.

Sequential dual-energy CT for longitudinal assessment of pathologic response to neoadjuvant immuno-chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer

Xiaoxiao Lin  1 , Shuning Xu  2 , Yi Wang  3 , Fei Ma  4 , Jinrong Qu  1 , Yue Wu  1 , Jing Li  5
Affiliations

Sequential dual-energy CT for longitudinal assessment of pathologic response to neoadjuvant immuno-chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer

Xiaoxiao Lin et al. Eur Radiol. .

Abstract

Objectives: To longitudinally evaluate pathologic response outcomes after neoadjuvant immuno-chemotherapy (NICT) for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) using pre- and post-treatment dual-energy CT (DECT).

Materials and methods: Between Jan 2021 and Dec 2023, 115 patients who underwent NICT plus gastrectomy and triple-phase enhanced DECT scans before and after NICT were retrospectively enrolled. Pathologic tumor regression grade (TRG) was the reference standard, patients were labelled as responders (TRG = 0 + 1) and non-responders (TRG = 2 + 3) accordingly. A two-dimensional free-hand region of interest method was adopted to obtain the iodine concentration (IC) values. Pre- and post-NICT IC and normalized IC (nIC) were measured at arterial/venous/delay phase (AP/VP/DP), respectively; their changes [ΔIC (%)] defined as (IC_post-IC_pre)⁄IC_pre × 100% were calculated. Pre- and post-NICT imaging parameters and their changes were compared between different response groups. Non-responders' associated parameters were selected using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Their performances were analyzed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Their associations with patient survival were explored by using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

Results: ICDP-pre, ΔICAP, thickness-post with cut-off value of > 2.306 mg/mL, ≤ 26.70%, > 18.5 mm, respectively, indicates non-responders with equivalent AUC being 0.616 (95% CI: 0.521-0.705), 0.625 (95% CI: 0.529-0.713), and 0.660 (95% CI: 0.565-0.745). Their combination demonstrated an improved AUC of 0.774 (95% CI: 0.686-0.846) and was associated with patient disease-free survival (DFS) with a hazard ratio being 2.239 (95% CI: 1.004-4.991) (p = 0.026).

Conclusion: Pre- and post-NICT DECT-based quantifications are useful for longitudinal assessment of pathologic response outcomes after NICT in LAGC. ICDP-pre, ΔICAP, and thickness-post are equally useful, their combination demonstrated incremental benefit.

Key points: Question Accurate evaluation of the efficacy of NICT in patients with LAGC remains challenging due to the lack of effective biomarkers. Findings Sequential DECT-based ICDP-pre, ΔICAP, and tumor thickness-post were predictive of TRG status. Their combination demonstrated enhanced performance and was associated with patient DFS. Clinical relevance DECT represents a promising imaging technique with added advantages for longitudinal assessment of pathologic response to NICT in LAGC, potentially facilitating more personalized treatment strategies among this population.

Keywords: Neoadjuvant therapy; Stomach neoplasms; Tomography (X-ray computed).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Compliance with ethical standards. Guarantor: The scientific guarantor of this publication is Jing Li. Conflict of interest: The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. Statistics and biometry: No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper. Informed consent: Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board due to the retrospective nature of the study. Ethical approval: Institutional Review Board approval was obtained at The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital. Study subjects or cohorts overlap: None. Methodology: Retrospective Diagnostic or prognostic study Performed at one institution

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Smyth EC, Nilsson M, Grabsch HI, van Grieken NC, Lordick F (2020) Gastric cancer. Lancet 396:635–648 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yuan SQ, Nie RC, Jin Y et al (2024) Perioperative toripalimab and chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric or gastro-esophageal junction cancer: a randomized phase 2 trial. Nat Med 30:552–559 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Li N, Li Z, Fu Q et al (2024) Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant sintilimab in combination with FLOT chemotherapy in patients with HER2-negative locally advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: an investigator-initiated, single-arm, open-label, phase II study. Int J Surg 110:2071–2084 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Sinnamon AJ, Savoldy M, Mehta R et al (2023) Tumor regression grade and overall survival following gastrectomy with preoperative therapy for gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 30:3580–3589 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ajani JA, D’Amico TA, Bentrem DJ et al (2022) Gastric cancer, version 2.2022, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 20:167–192 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources