1
|
Doppenberg D, Stoop TF, van Dieren S, Katz MHG, Janssen QP, Nasar N, Prakash LR, Theijse RT, Tzeng CWD, Wei AC, Zureikat AH, Groot Koerkamp B, Besselink MG. Serum CEA as a Prognostic Marker for Overall Survival in Patients with Localized Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma and Non-Elevated CA19-9 Levels Treated with FOLFIRINOX as Initial Treatment: A TAPS Consortium Study. Ann Surg Oncol 2024; 31:1919-1932. [PMID: 38170408 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-14680-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2023] [Accepted: 11/13/2023] [Indexed: 01/05/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION About 25% of patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma have non-elevated serum carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 levels at baseline, hampering evaluation of response to preoperative treatment. Serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is a potential alternative. METHODS This retrospective cohort study from five referral centers included consecutive patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma (2012-2019), treated with one or more cycles of (m)FOLFIRINOX, and non-elevated CA19-9 levels (i.e., < 37 U/mL) at baseline. Cox regression analyses were performed to assess prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), including CEA level at baseline, restaging, and dynamics. RESULTS Overall, 277 patients were included in this study. CEA at baseline was elevated (≥5 ng/mL) in 53 patients (33%) and normalized following preoperative therapy in 14 patients (26%). In patients with elevated CEA at baseline, median OS in patients with CEA normalization following preoperative therapy was 33 months versus 19 months in patients without CEA normalization (p = 0.088). At time of baseline, only elevated CEA was independently associated with (worse) OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.98). At time of restaging, elevated CEA at baseline was still the only independent predictor for (worse) OS (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.04-1.98), whereas elevated CEA at restaging (HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.77-1.77) was not. CONCLUSIONS Serum CEA was elevated in one-third of patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma having non-elevated CA19-9 at baseline. At both time of baseline and time of restaging, elevated serum CEA measured at baseline was the only predictor for (worse) OS. Therefore, serum CEA may be a useful tool for decision making at both initial staging and time of restaging in patients with non-elevated CA19-9.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deesje Doppenberg
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Thomas F Stoop
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Matthew H G Katz
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Quisette P Janssen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Naaz Nasar
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Laura R Prakash
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Rutger T Theijse
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ching-Wei D Tzeng
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Alice C Wei
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Amer H Zureikat
- Division of Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Stoop TF, Theijse RT, Seelen LWF, Groot Koerkamp B, van Eijck CHJ, Wolfgang CL, van Tienhoven G, van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ, Wilmink JW, Del Chiaro M, Katz MHG, Hackert T, Besselink MG. Preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgical decision-making in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2024; 21:101-124. [PMID: 38036745 DOI: 10.1038/s41575-023-00856-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/05/2023] [Indexed: 12/02/2023]
Abstract
Surgical resection combined with systemic chemotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment for patients with localized pancreatic cancer. Upfront surgery is considered suboptimal in cases with extensive vascular involvement, which can be classified as either borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In these patients, FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy is currently used as preoperative chemotherapy and is eventually combined with radiotherapy. Thus, more patients might reach 5-year overall survival. Patient selection for chemotherapy, radiotherapy and subsequent surgery is based on anatomical, biological and conditional parameters. Current guidelines and clinical practices vary considerably regarding preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy, response evaluation, and indications for surgery. In this Review, we provide an overview of the clinical evidence regarding disease staging, preoperative therapy, response evaluation and surgery in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In addition, a clinical work-up is proposed based on the available evidence and guidelines. We identify knowledge gaps and outline a proposed research agenda.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas F Stoop
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - Rutger T Theijse
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Leonard W F Seelen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Casper H J van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Christopher L Wolfgang
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, New York University Medical Center, New York City, NY, USA
| | - Geertjan van Tienhoven
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Johanna W Wilmink
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Marco Del Chiaro
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - Matthew H G Katz
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Yang HK, Park MS, Han K, Eom G, Chung YE, Choi JY, Bang S, Kang CM, Seong J, Kim MJ. Risk Stratification of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Patients Undergoing Curative-Intent Surgery after Neoadjuvant Therapy. Cancer Res Treat 2024; 56:247-258. [PMID: 37605535 PMCID: PMC10789942 DOI: 10.4143/crt.2023.586] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2023] [Accepted: 08/21/2023] [Indexed: 08/23/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Clinical prognostic criteria using preoperative factors were not developed for post-neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) surgery of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We aimed to identify preoperative factors associated with overall survival (OS) in PDAC patients who underwent post-NAT curative-intent surgery and develop risk stratification criteria. MATERIALS AND METHODS Consecutive PDAC patients who underwent post-NAT curative-intent surgeries between 2007 and 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic, laboratory, surgical, and histopathologic variables were collected. Baseline, preoperative, and interval changes of computed tomography (CT) findings proposed by the Society of Abdominal Radiology and the American Pancreatic Association were analyzed. Cox proportional hazard analysis was used to select preoperative variables associated with OS. We developed risk stratification criteria composed of the significant preoperative variables, i.e., post-NAT response criteria. We compared the discrimination performance of post-NAT response criteria with that of post-NAT pathological (yp) American Joint Cancer Committee TNM staging system. RESULTS One hundred forty-five PDAC patients were included. Stable or increased tumor size on CT (hazard ratio [HR], 2.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.58 to 4.21; p < 0.001) and elevated preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) level (HR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.11 to 3.55; p=0.021) were independent factors of OS. The OS of the patient groups stratified by post-NAT response criteria which combined changes in tumor size and CA19-9 showed significant difference (p < 0.001). Such stratification was comparable to ypTNM staging in discrimination performance (difference of C-index, 0.068; 95% CI, -0.012 to 0.142). CONCLUSION "Any degree of decrease in tumor size on CT" and CA19-9 normalization or staying normal were independent favorable factors of OS. The combination of the two factors discriminated OS comparably to ypTNM staging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hyun Kyung Yang
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Mi-Suk Park
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kyunghwa Han
- Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Sciences and Center for Clinical Imaging Data Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Geonsik Eom
- Department of Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Yong Eun Chung
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jin-Young Choi
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Seungmin Bang
- Department of Internal Medicine, Severance Hospital, Institute of Gastroenterology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Chang Moo Kang
- Department of Surgery, Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jinsil Seong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Myeong-Jin Kim
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Shetty NS, Agarwal U, Choudhari A, Gupta A, PG N, Bhandare M, Gala K, Chandra D, Ramaswamy A, Ostwal V, Shrikhande SV, Kulkarni SS. Imaging Recommendations for Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Pancreatic Cancer. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 2023. [DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1759521] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/08/2023] Open
Abstract
AbstractPancreatic cancer is the fourth most prevalent cause of cancer-related death worldwide, with a fatality rate equal to its incidence rate. Pancreatic cancer is a rare malignancy with a global incidence and death ranking of 14th and 7th, respectively. Pancreatic cancer cases are divided into three categories without metastatic disease: resectable, borderline resectable, or locally advanced disease. The category is determined by the tumor's location in the pancreas and whether it is abutting or encasing the adjacent arteries and/or vein/s.The stage of disease and the location of the primary tumor determine the clinical presentation: the pancreatic head, neck, or uncinate process, the body or tail, or multifocal disease. Imaging plays a crucial role in the diagnosis and follow-up of pancreatic cancers. Various imaging modalities available for pancreatic imaging are ultrasonography (USG), contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and 18-fluoro-deoxy glucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET).Even though surgical resection is possible in both resectable and borderline resectable non-metastatic cases, neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy has become the standard practice for borderline resectable cases as it gives a high yield of R0 resection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nitin Sudhakar Shetty
- Department of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Ujjwal Agarwal
- Department of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Amit Choudhari
- Department of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Anurag Gupta
- Department of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Nandakumar PG
- Department of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Manish Bhandare
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Kunal Gala
- Department of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Daksh Chandra
- Department of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Anant Ramaswamy
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Vikas Ostwal
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Shailesh V. Shrikhande
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Suyash S. Kulkarni
- Department of Radio-Diagnosis, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National University (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Marti-Bonmati L, Cerdá-Alberich L, Pérez-Girbés A, Díaz Beveridge R, Montalvá Orón E, Pérez Rojas J, Alberich-Bayarri A. Pancreatic cancer, radiomics and artificial intelligence. Br J Radiol 2022; 95:20220072. [PMID: 35687700 PMCID: PMC10996946 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20220072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2022] [Revised: 05/19/2022] [Accepted: 05/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are generally classified into four categories based on contrast-enhanced CT at diagnosis: resectable, borderline resectable, unresectable, and metastatic disease. In the initial grading and staging of PDAC, structured radiological templates are useful but limited, as there is a need to define the aggressiveness and microscopic disease stage of these tumours to ensure adequate treatment allocation. Quantitative imaging analysis allows radiomics and dynamic imaging features to provide information of clinical outcomes, and to construct clinical models based on radiomics signatures or imaging phenotypes. These quantitative features may be used as prognostic and predictive biomarkers in clinical decision-making, enabling personalised management of advanced PDAC. Deep learning and convolutional neural networks also provide high level bioinformatics tools that can help define features associated with a given aspect of PDAC biology and aggressiveness, paving the way to define outcomes based on these features. Thus, the prediction of tumour phenotype, treatment response and patient prognosis may be feasible by using such comprehensive and integrated radiomics models. Despite these promising results, quantitative imaging is not ready for clinical implementation in PDAC. Limitations include the instability of metrics and lack of external validation. Large properly annotated datasets, including relevant semantic features (demographics, blood markers, genomics), image harmonisation, robust radiomics analysis, clinically significant tasks as outputs, comparisons with gold-standards (such as TNM or pretreatment classifications) and fully independent validation cohorts, will be required for the development of trustworthy radiomics and artificial intelligence solutions to predict PDAC aggressiveness in a clinical setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luis Marti-Bonmati
- GIBI230 Research Group on Biomedical Imaging, Instituto de
Investigación Sanitaria La Fe,
Valencia, Spain
- Department of Radiology, Hospital Universitario y
Politécnico La Fe, Valencia,
Spain
| | - Leonor Cerdá-Alberich
- GIBI230 Research Group on Biomedical Imaging, Instituto de
Investigación Sanitaria La Fe,
Valencia, Spain
| | | | | | - Eva Montalvá Orón
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Universitario y
Politécnico La Fe, Valencia,
Spain
| | - Judith Pérez Rojas
- Department of Pathology, Hospital Universitario y
Politécnico La Fe, Valencia,
Spain
| | - Angel Alberich-Bayarri
- GIBI230 Research Group on Biomedical Imaging, Instituto de
Investigación Sanitaria La Fe,
Valencia, Spain
- Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim
SL, Valencia,
Spain
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Structured Reporting in Radiological Settings: Pitfalls and Perspectives. J Pers Med 2022; 12:jpm12081344. [PMID: 36013293 PMCID: PMC9409900 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12081344] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2022] [Revised: 08/08/2022] [Accepted: 08/17/2022] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this manuscript is to give an overview of structured reporting in radiological settings. Materials and Method: This article is a narrative review on structured reporting in radiological settings. Particularly, limitations and future perspectives are analyzed. RESULTS: The radiological report is a communication tool for the referring physician and the patients. It was conceived as a free text report (FTR) to allow radiologists to have their own individuality in the description of the radiological findings. However, this form could suffer from content, style, and presentation discrepancies, with a probability of transferring incorrect radiological data. Quality, datafication/quantification, and accessibility represent the three main goals in moving from FTRs to structured reports (SRs). In fact, the quality is related to standardization, which aims to improve communication and clarification. Moreover, a “structured” checklist, which allows all the fundamental items for a particular radiological study to be reported and permits the connection of the radiological data with clinical features, allowing a personalized medicine. With regard to accessibility, since radiological reports can be considered a source of research data, SR allows data mining to obtain new biomarkers and to help the development of new application domains, especially in the field of radiomics. Conclusions: Structured reporting could eliminate radiologist individuality, allowing a standardized approach.
Collapse
|
7
|
Soloff EV, Al-Hawary MM, Desser TS, Fishman EK, Minter RM, Zins M. Imaging Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer Resectability After Neoadjuvant Therapy: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2022; 218:570-581. [PMID: 34851713 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.21.26931] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Despite important innovations in the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), PDAC remains a disease with poor prognosis and high mortality. A key area for potential improvement in the management of PDAC, aside from earlier detection in patients with treatable disease, is the improved ability of imaging techniques to differentiate treatment response after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) from worsening disease. It is well established that current imaging techniques cannot reliably make this distinction. This narrative review provides an update on the imaging assessment of pancreatic cancer resectability after NAT. Current definitions of borderline resectable PDAC, as well as implications for determining likely patient benefit from NAT, are described. Challenges associated with PDAC pathologic evaluation and surgical decision making that are of relevance to radiologists are discussed. Also explored are the specific limitations of imaging in differentiating the response after NAT from stable or worsening disease, including issues relating to protocol optimization, tumor size assessment, vascular assessment, and liver metastasis detection. The roles of MRI as well as PET and/or hybrid imaging are considered. Finally, a short PDAC reporting template is provided for use after NAT. The highlighted methods seek to improve radiologists' assessment of PDAC treatment response after NAT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erik V Soloff
- Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Mahmoud M Al-Hawary
- Department of Radiology and Internal Medicine, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Terry S Desser
- Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA
| | - Elliot K Fishman
- Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD
| | - Rebecca M Minter
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI
| | - Marc Zins
- Department of Radiology, Groupe Hospitalier Paris Saint Joseph, 185 Rue R Losserand, Paris 75014, France
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Structured Reporting of Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance in the Staging of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Delphi Consensus Proposal. Diagnostics (Basel) 2021; 11:diagnostics11112033. [PMID: 34829384 PMCID: PMC8621603 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11112033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2021] [Revised: 10/31/2021] [Accepted: 11/01/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Structured reporting (SR) in radiology has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR)-based reports in pancreatic adenocarcinoma during the staging phase in order to improve communication between the radiologist and members of multidisciplinary teams. Materials and Methods: A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A modified Delphi process was used to develop the CT-SR and MRI-SR, assessing a level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation. Results: The final CT-SR version was built by including n = 16 items in the “Patient Clinical Data” section, n = 11 items in the “Clinical Evaluation” section, n = 7 items in the “Imaging Protocol” section, and n = 18 items in the “Report” section. Overall, 52 items were included in the final version of the CT-SR. The final MRI-SR version was built by including n = 16 items in the “Patient Clinical Data” section, n = 11 items in the “Clinical Evaluation” section, n = 8 items in the “Imaging Protocol” section, and n = 14 items in the “Report” section. Overall, 49 items were included in the final version of the MRI-SR. In the first round for CT-SR, all sections received more than a good rating. The overall mean score of the experts was 4.85. The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.85. In the second round, the overall mean score of the experts was 4.87, and the Cα correlation coefficient was 0.94. In the first round, for MRI-SR, all sections received more than a good rating. The overall mean score of the experts was 4.73. The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.82. In the second round, the overall mean score of the experts was 4.91, and the Cα correlation coefficient was 0.93. Conclusions: The CT-SR and MRI-SR are based on a multi-round consensus-building Delphi exercise derived from the multidisciplinary agreement of expert radiologists in order to obtain more appropriate communication tools for referring physicians.
Collapse
|