Delayed percentage attenuation ratio (DPAR) on multiphase CT as a quantitative predictor of early response in hepatocellular carcinoma

Authors

  • Yana Supriatna Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
  • Rifki Bachtiar Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada; Gadjah Mada University Academic Hospital, Yogyakarta, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3601-3439
  • Muhammad Y. Makkaraeng Radiology Research and Training Office, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
  • Arif Budiman Regional General Hospital of Bima City, Bima, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0009-0002-4551-0779

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v6i1.2996

Keywords:

hepatocellular carcinoma, transarterial chemoembolization, computed tomography, delayed percentage attenuation ratio, imaging biomarker

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a major cause of cancer-related mortality, and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the standard therapy for intermediate-stage disease. However, response to TACE is variable, and reliable quantitative imaging biomarkers are needed to support early treatment decision-making. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive value of the delayed percentage attenuation ratio (DPAR) measured from pre-TACE multiphasic computed tomography (CT) in forecasting early therapeutic response. A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted involving patients with a definitive diagnosis of HCC who underwent their first TACE session and had complete multiphasic CT imaging before and after treatment. Quantitative washout parameters, delayed percentage attenuation ratio (DPAR), absolute washout (WOAbs), and relative washout (WORel) were measured using standardized region of interest (ROI) placement by three radiologists. Treatment response was assessed four to six weeks post-TACE based on modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) criteria and classified into responders and non-responders. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, and interobserver reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cohen’s κ. A total of 49 HCC patients were included and analyzed. Responders demonstrated significantly higher DPAR values compared with non-responders (median 134.5 vs 113.0; p<0.001). DPAR showed the strongest discriminative performance with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.898, outperforming WOAbs (AUC 0.689) and WORel (AUC 0.704). The optimal DPAR threshold of ≥120.5 provided 84.4% sensitivity and 88.2% specificity to predict early post-TACE treatment response. Interobserver reliability was excellent for all washout parameters (ICC 0.98–0.99), and agreement for mRECIST classification was also excellent (κ=0.867). In conclusion, pre-TACE DPAR is a robust and reproducible quantitative imaging biomarker that accurately predicts early response to TACE in HCC. A threshold value of ≥120.5 may assist in treatment planning and patient selection in routine clinical practice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Parra NS, Ross HM, Khan A, Wu M, Goldberg R, Shah L, et al. Advancements in the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma. International Journal of Translational Medicine. 2023;3:51–65. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijtm3010005

Dasgupta P, Henshaw C, Youlden DR, Clark PJ, Aitken JF, Baade PD. Global Trends in Incidence Rates of Primary Adult Liver Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Oncol. 2020;10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00171

Kementerian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia. Pedoman Nasional Pelayanan Kedokteran: Tata Laksana Karsinoma Sel Hati pada Dewasa. Jakarta: Kementerian Kesehatan RI; 2022.

Galle PR, Forner A, Llovet JM, Mazzaferro V, Piscaglia F, Raoul J-L, et al. EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2018;69:182–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2018.03.019

Marrero JA, Kulik LM, Sirlin CB, Zhu AX, Finn RS, Abecassis MM, et al. Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: 2018 Practice Guidance by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology. 2018;68:723–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.29913

Liu YI, Shin LK, Jeffrey RB, Kamaya A. Quantitatively Defining Washout in Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:84–9. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.7171

Müller L, Hahn F, Jungmann F, Mähringer-Kunz A, Stoehr F, Halfmann MC, et al. Quantitative washout in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing TACE: an imaging biomarker for predicting prognosis? Cancer Imaging. 2022;22:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-022-00446-6

Fronda M, Doriguzzi Breatta A, Gatti M, Calandri M, Maglia C, Bergamasco L, et al. Quantitative assessment of HCC wash-out on CT is a predictor of early complete response to TACE. Eur Radiol. 2021;31:6578–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07792-2

Reig M, Forner A, Rimola J, Ferrer-Fàbrega J, Burrel M, Garcia-Criado Á, et al. BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update. J Hepatol. 2022;76:681–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2021.11.018

Bryant MK, Dorn DP, Zarzour J, Smith JK, Redden DT, Saddekni S, et al. Computed tomography predictors of hepatocellular carcinoma tumour necrosis after chemoembolization. HPB. 2014;16:327–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/hpb.12149

Garde PS, Bhute RB. Liver Anatomy and Cross-Sectional Imaging Techniques: A Practical Approach. J Gastrointest Abdom Radiol. 2023;06:089–100. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1767727

Armed P, Munir A, Zameer S. Role of Delayed Phase Tumor Contrast Washout in Patients of Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Computed Tomography. Forces Med J. 2019.

Downloads

How to Cite

Supriatna, Y., Bachtiar, R., Makkaraeng, M. Y., & Budiman, A. (2026). Delayed percentage attenuation ratio (DPAR) on multiphase CT as a quantitative predictor of early response in hepatocellular carcinoma. Narra J, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v6i1.2996

Issue

Section

Original Article

Citations