Wu L, Zhu JJ, Liang XH, Tong H, Song Y. Predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging parameters combined with tumor markers for rectal cancer recurrence risk after surgery. World J Gastrointest Surg 2025; 17(2): 101897 [DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i2.101897]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Yan Song, Associate Chief Physician, MD, Department of Radiology, Jieshou City People’s Hospital, No. 399 Renmin East Road, Fuyang 236500, Anhui Province, China. jssy7211@163.com
Research Domain of This Article
Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Article-Type of This Article
Retrospective Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Gastrointest Surg. Feb 27, 2025; 17(2): 101897 Published online Feb 27, 2025. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i2.101897
Table 1 Difference analysis between high recurrence risk group and low recurrence risk group
Variables
Total (n = 90)
LRR group (n = 53)
HRR group (n = 37)
Statistic
P value
Age (year), mean ± SD
64.92 ± 10.44
64.66 ± 10.98
65.30 ± 9.75
t = -0.28
0.778
Sex, n (%)
χ² = 1.79
0.180
Female
29 (32.22)
20 (37.74)
9 (24.32)
-
-
Male
61 (67.78)
33 (62.26)
28 (75.68)
-
-
BMI, mean ± SD
25.31 ± 2.90
25.08 ± 2.90
25.63 ± 2.92
t = -0.88
0.380
Smoking, n (%)
χ² = 0.37
0.541
No
65 (72.22)
37 (69.81)
28 (75.68)
-
-
Yes
25 (27.78)
16 (30.19)
9 (24.32)
-
-
Drinking, n (%)
χ² = 0.11
0.737
No
59 (65.56)
34 (64.15)
25 (67.57)
-
-
Yes
31 (34.44)
19 (35.85)
12 (32.43)
-
-
Family history, n (%)
χ² = 0.00
1.000
No
80 (88.89)
47 (88.68)
33 (89.19)
-
-
Yes
10 (11.11)
6 (11.32)
4 (10.81)
-
-
Complication, n (%)
χ² = 0.32
0.571
No
47 (52.22)
29 (54.72)
18 (48.65)
-
-
Yes
43 (47.78)
24 (45.28)
19 (51.35)
-
-
MTL, mean ± SD
3.98 ± 1.29
3.82 ± 1.30
4.22 ± 1.25
t = -1.48
0.141
Tumor location, n (%)
χ² = 0.48
0.787
Low
32 (35.56)
20 (37.74)
12 (32.43)
-
-
Median
39 (43.33)
23 (43.40)
16 (43.24)
-
-
High
19 (21.11)
10 (18.87)
9 (24.32)
-
-
MrT staging, n (%)
χ² = 2.81
0.094
I or II
46 (51.11)
31 (58.49)
15 (40.54)
-
-
III or IV
44 (48.89)
22 (41.51)
22 (59.46)
-
-
MrN staging, n (%)
χ² = 4.43
0.035
0 or I
46 (51.11)
32 (60.38)
14 (37.84)
-
-
II or III
44 (48.89)
21 (39.62)
23 (62.16)
-
-
CRM, n (%)
χ² = 8.25
0.004
Negative
38 (42.22)
29 (54.72)
9 (24.32)
-
-
Positive
52 (57.78)
24 (45.28)
28 (75.68)
-
-
EMVI, n (%)
-
-
-
χ² = 4.50
0.034
Negative
60 (66.67)
40 (75.47)
20 (54.05)
-
-
Positive
30 (33.33)
13 (24.53)
17 (45.95)
-
-
CEA, mean ± SD
40.08 ± 11.25
35.57 ± 9.31
46.55 ± 10.71
t = -5.17
< 0.001
CA125, mean ± SD
11.72 ± 5.25
11.07 ± 5.28
12.66 ± 5.13
t = -1.42
0.160
CA199, mean ± SD
56.58 ± 11.18
50.44 ± 7.85
65.39 ± 9.19
t = -8.29
< 0.001
Table 2 Univariate logistic regression analysis
Variables
β
SE
Z
P value
OR (95%CI)
Age
0.01
0.02
0.29
0.775
1.01 (0.97-1.05)
Sex
Female
-
-
-
-
1.00 (Reference)
Male
0.63
0.48
1.33
0.183
1.89 (0.74-4.80)
BMI
0.07
0.08
0.88
0.377
1.07 (0.92-1.24)
Smoking
No
-
-
-
-
1.00 (Reference)
Yes
-0.30
0.49
-0.61
0.542
0.74 (0.29-1.93)
Drinking
No
-
-
-
-
1.00 (Reference)
Yes
-0.15
0.45
-0.34
0.737
0.86 (0.35-2.09)
Family history
No
-
-
-
-
1.00 (Reference)
Yes
-0.05
0.68
-0.08
0.940
0.95 (0.25-3.63)
Complication
No
-
-
-
-
1.00 (Reference)
Yes
0.24
0.43
0.57
0.571
1.28 (0.55-2.96)
MTL
0.26
0.17
1.47
0.143
1.29 (0.92- 1.82)
Tumor location
Low
-
-
-
-
1.00 (Reference)
Median
0.15
0.49
0.30
0.762
1.16 (0.44-3.02)
High
0.41
0.59
0.69
0.490
1.50 (0.47-4.74)
MrT staging
I or II
-
-
-
-
1.00 (Reference)
III or IV
0.73
0.44
1.67
0.096
2.07 (0.88-4.85)
MrN staging
0 or I
-
-
-
-
1.00 (Reference)
II or III
0.92
0.44
2.08
0.037
2.50 (1.06-5.93)
CRM
Negative
-
-
-
-
1.00 (Reference)
Positive
1.32
0.47
2.80
0.005
3.76 (1.49-9.49)
EMVI
Negative
-
-
-
-
1.00 (Reference)
Positive
0.96
0.46
2.09
0.036
2.62 (1.06-6.43)
CEA
0.11
0.03
4.06
< 0.001
1.12 (1.06-1.18)
CA125
0.06
0.04
1.40
0.161
1.06 (0.98-1.15)
CA199
0.22
0.04
4.95
< 0.001
1.24 (1.14-1.35)
Table 3 Multivariate logistic regression analysis
Variables
β
SE
Z
P value
OR (95%CI)
VIF
EMVI
-
-
-
-
-
-
Negative
-
-
-
-
1.00 (Reference)
-
Positive
1.46
0.72
2.01
0.045
4.29 (1.04-17.76)
2.31
CEA
0.07
0.04
2.04
0.041
1.08 (1.01-1.15)
1.60
CA125
0.18
0.08
2.13
0.034
1.19 (1.01-1.40)
1.32
CA199
0.24
0.06
3.95
< 0.001
1.27 (1.13-1.44)
1.49
Table 4 Confusion matrix analysis of clinical predictive models
AUC (95%CI)
Accuracy (95%CI)
Sensitivity (95%CI)
Specificity (95%CI)
PPV (95%CI)
NPV (95%CI)
Cut off
0.93 (0.89-0.98)
0.83 (0.74-0.90)
0.74 (0.62-0.85)
0.97 (0.92-1.00)
0.98 (0.93-1.00)
0.72 (0.60-0.84)
0.145
Citation: Wu L, Zhu JJ, Liang XH, Tong H, Song Y. Predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging parameters combined with tumor markers for rectal cancer recurrence risk after surgery. World J Gastrointest Surg 2025; 17(2): 101897