| 1. |
- Nikolić, O., et al.
(author)
-
Vulvar cancer staging: guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)
- 2021
-
In: Insights into Imaging. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1869-4101. ; 12:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: The aim of the Female Pelvic Imaging Working Group of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) was to develop imaging staging guidelines for vulvar cancer and to propose standardised MRI protocols and reporting. Methods: The guidelines recommended from the ESUR in this article resulted from a questionnaire analysis regarding imaging staging of vulvar cancer that was answered by all members of the Female Pelvic Imaging Working Group. Only the answers with an agreement equal to or more than 80% were considered. Additionally, the literature was reviewed to complement and further support our conclusions. Results: The critical review of the literature and consensus obtained among experts allows for recommendations regarding imaging staging guidelines, patient preparation, MRI protocol, and a structured MRI report. Conclusions: Standardising image acquisition techniques and MRI interpretation reduces ambiguity and ultimately improves the contribution of radiology to the staging and management of patients with vulvar cancer. Moreover, structured reporting assists with the communication of clinically relevant information to the referring physician. © 2021, The Author(s).
|
|
| 2. |
- Wibmer, A. G., et al.
(author)
-
Local Extent of Prostate Cancer at MRI versus Prostatectomy Histopathology: Associations with Long-term Oncologic Outcomes
- 2022
-
In: Radiology. - : Radiological Society of North America (RSNA). - 1527-1315 .- 0033-8419. ; 302:3, s. 595-602
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background It is unknown how the imperfect accuracy of MRI for local staging of prostate cancer relates to oncologic outcomes. Purpose To analyze how staging discordances between MRI and histopathologic evaluation relate to recurrence and survival after radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant retrospective analysis of preprostatectomy T2-weighted prostate MRI (January 2001 to December 2006). Extraprostatic extension and seminal vesicle invasion were assessed by using five-point Likert scales; scores of 4 or higher were classified as positive. Biochemical recurrence (BCR), metastases, and prostate cancer-specific mortality rates were estimated with Kaplan-Meier and Cox models. Results A total of 2160 patients (median age, 60 years; interquartile range, 55-64 years) were evaluated. Among patients with histopathologic extraprostatic (pT3) disease (683 of 2160; 32%), those with organ-confined disease at MRI (384 of 683; 56%) experienced better outcomes than those with concordant extraprostatic disease at MRI and pathologic analysis: 15-year risk for BCR, 30% (95% CI: 22, 40) versus 68% (95% CI: 60, 75); risk for metastases, 14% (95% CI: 8.4, 24) versus 32% (95% CI: 26, 39); risk for prostate cancer-specific mortality, 3% (95% CI: 1, 6) versus 15% (95% CI: 9.5, 23) (P < .001 for all comparisons). Among patients with histopathologic organ-confined disease (pT2) (1477 of 2160; 68%), those with extraprostatic disease at MRI (102 of 1477; 7%) were at higher risk for BCR (27% [95% CI: 19, 37] vs 10% [95% CI: 8, 14]; P < .001), metastases (19% [95% CI: 6, 48] vs 3% [95% CI: 1, 6]; P < .001), and prostate cancer-specific mortality (2% [95% CI: 1, 9] vs 1% [95% CI: 0, 5]; P = .009) than those with concordant organ-confined disease at MRI and pathologic analysis. At multivariable analyses, tumor extent at MRI (hazard ratio range, 4.1-5.2) and histopathologic evaluation (hazard ratio range, 3.6-6.7) was associated with the risk for BCR, metastases, and prostate cancer-specific mortality (P < .001 for all analyses). Conclusion The local extent of prostate cancer at MRI is associated with oncologic outcomes after prostatectomy, independent of pathologic tumor stage. This might inform a strategy on how to integrate MRI into a clinical staging algorithm. ©RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Gottlieb in this issue.
|
|
| 3. |
- Wibmer, A. G., et al.
(author)
-
Oncologic Outcomes after Localized Prostate Cancer Treatment: Associations with Pretreatment Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings
- 2021
-
In: Journal of Urology. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0022-5347 .- 1527-3792. ; 205:4, s. 1055-1062
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Purpose: We investigated whether T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging findings could improve upon established prognostic indicators of metastatic disease and prostate cancer specific survival. Materials and Methods: For a cohort of 3,406 consecutive men who underwent prostate magnetic resonance imaging before prostatectomy (2,160) or radiotherapy (1,246) between 2001 and 2006, T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging exams were retrospectively interpreted and categorized as I) no focal suspicious lesion, II) organ confined focal lesion, III) focal lesion with extraprostatic extension or IV) focal lesion with seminal vesicle invasion. Clinical risk was recorded based on European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines and the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) scoring system. Survival probabilities and c-indices were estimated using Cox models and inverse probability censoring weights, respectively. Results: The median followup was 10.8 years (IQR 8.6-13.0). Higher magnetic resonance imaging categories were associated with a higher likelihood of developing metastases (HR 3.5-18.1, p<0.001 for all magnetic resonance imaging categories) and prostate cancer death (HR 3.1-29.7, p<0.001-0.025); these associations were statistically independent of EAU risk categories, CAPRA scores and treatment type (surgery vs radiation). Combining EAU risk or CAPRA scores with magnetic resonance imaging categories significantly improved prognostication of metastases (c-indices: EAU: 0.798, EAU + magnetic resonance imaging: 0.872; CAPRA: 0.808, CAPRA + magnetic resonance imaging: 0.877) and prostate cancer death (c-indices: EAU 0.813, EAU + magnetic resonance imaging: 0.889; CAPRA: 0.814, CAPRA + magnetic resonance imaging: 0.892; p<0.001 for all). Conclusion: Magnetic resonance imaging findings of localized prostate cancer are associated with clinically relevant long-term oncologic outcomes. Combining magnetic resonance imaging and clinicopathological data results in more accurate prognostication, which could facilitate individualized patient management.
|
|
