1
|
Smits M, Rockall A, Constantinescu SN, Sardanelli F, Martí-Bonmatí L. Translating radiological research into practice-from discovery to clinical impact. Insights Imaging 2024; 15:13. [PMID: 38228934 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-023-01596-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2023] [Accepted: 11/17/2023] [Indexed: 01/18/2024] Open
Abstract
At the European Society of Radiology (ESR), we strive to provide evidence for radiological practices that improve patient outcomes and have a societal impact. Successful translation of radiological research into clinical practice requires multiple factors including tailored methodology, a multidisciplinary approach aiming beyond technical validation, and a focus on unmet clinical needs. Low levels of evidence are a threat to radiology, resulting in low visibility and credibility. Here, we provide the background and rationale for the thematic series Translating radiological research into practice-from discovery to clinical impact, inviting authors to describe their processes of achieving clinically impactful radiological research. We describe the challenges unique to radiological research. Additionally, a survey was sent to non-radiological clinical societies. The majority of respondents (6/11) were in the field of gastrointestinal/abdominal medicine. The implementation of CT/MRI techniques for disease characterisation, detection and staging of cancer, and treatment planning and radiological interventions were mentioned as the most important radiological developments in the past years. The perception was that patients are substantially unaware of the impact of these developments. Unmet clinical needs were mostly early diagnosis and staging of cancer, microstructural/functional assessment of tissues and organs, and implant assessment. All but one respondent considered radiology important for research in their discipline, but five indicated that radiology is currently not involved in their research. Radiology research holds the potential for being transformative to medical practice. It is our responsibility to take the lead in studies including radiology and strive towards the highest levels of evidence.Critical relevance statement For radiological research to make a clinical and societal impact, radiologists should take the lead in radiological studies, go beyond the assessment of technical feasibility and diagnostic accuracy, and-in a multidisciplinary approach-address clinical unmet needs.Key points• Multiple factors are essential for radiological research to make a clinical and societal impact.• Radiological research needs to go beyond diagnostic accuracy and address unmet clinical needs.• Radiologists should take the lead in radiological studies with a multidisciplinary approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marion Smits
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC - University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- Medical Delta, Delft, The Netherlands.
| | - Andrea Rockall
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Department of Radiology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Stefan N Constantinescu
- Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Brussels, Belgium
- de Duve Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium
- WEL Research Institute, WELBIO Department, Wavre, Belgium
- Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università Degli Studi Di Milano, Milan, Italy
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Luis Martí-Bonmatí
- Department of Radiology and GIBI230 Research Group On Biomedical Imaging, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Rockall AG, Li X, Johnson N, Lavdas I, Santhakumaran S, Prevost AT, Punwani S, Goh V, Barwick TD, Bharwani N, Sandhu A, Sidhu H, Plumb A, Burn J, Fagan A, Wengert GJ, Koh DM, Reczko K, Dou Q, Warwick J, Liu X, Messiou C, Tunariu N, Boavida P, Soneji N, Johnston EW, Kelly-Morland C, De Paepe KN, Sokhi H, Wallitt K, Lakhani A, Russell J, Salib M, Vinnicombe S, Haq A, Aboagye EO, Taylor S, Glocker B. Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning in Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Metastases in Patients With Lung or Colon Cancer: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study. Invest Radiol 2023; 58:823-831. [PMID: 37358356 PMCID: PMC10662596 DOI: 10.1097/rli.0000000000000996] [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: 03/22/2023] [Accepted: 05/01/2023] [Indexed: 06/27/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) has been demonstrated to be efficient and cost-effective for cancer staging. The study aim was to develop a machine learning (ML) algorithm to improve radiologists' sensitivity and specificity for metastasis detection and reduce reading times. MATERIALS AND METHODS A retrospective analysis of 438 prospectively collected WB-MRI scans from multicenter Streamline studies (February 2013-September 2016) was undertaken. Disease sites were manually labeled using Streamline reference standard. Whole-body MRI scans were randomly allocated to training and testing sets. A model for malignant lesion detection was developed based on convolutional neural networks and a 2-stage training strategy. The final algorithm generated lesion probability heat maps. Using a concurrent reader paradigm, 25 radiologists (18 experienced, 7 inexperienced in WB-/MRI) were randomly allocated WB-MRI scans with or without ML support to detect malignant lesions over 2 or 3 reading rounds. Reads were undertaken in the setting of a diagnostic radiology reading room between November 2019 and March 2020. Reading times were recorded by a scribe. Prespecified analysis included sensitivity, specificity, interobserver agreement, and reading time of radiology readers to detect metastases with or without ML support. Reader performance for detection of the primary tumor was also evaluated. RESULTS Four hundred thirty-three evaluable WB-MRI scans were allocated to algorithm training (245) or radiology testing (50 patients with metastases, from primary 117 colon [n = 117] or lung [n = 71] cancer). Among a total 562 reads by experienced radiologists over 2 reading rounds, per-patient specificity was 86.2% (ML) and 87.7% (non-ML) (-1.5% difference; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.4%, 3.5%; P = 0.39). Sensitivity was 66.0% (ML) and 70.0% (non-ML) (-4.0% difference; 95% CI, -13.5%, 5.5%; P = 0.344). Among 161 reads by inexperienced readers, per-patient specificity in both groups was 76.3% (0% difference; 95% CI, -15.0%, 15.0%; P = 0.613), with sensitivity of 73.3% (ML) and 60.0% (non-ML) (13.3% difference; 95% CI, -7.9%, 34.5%; P = 0.313). Per-site specificity was high (>90%) for all metastatic sites and experience levels. There was high sensitivity for the detection of primary tumors (lung cancer detection rate of 98.6% with and without ML [0.0% difference; 95% CI, -2.0%, 2.0%; P = 1.00], colon cancer detection rate of 89.0% with and 90.6% without ML [-1.7% difference; 95% CI, -5.6%, 2.2%; P = 0.65]). When combining all reads from rounds 1 and 2, reading times fell by 6.2% (95% CI, -22.8%, 10.0%) when using ML. Round 2 read-times fell by 32% (95% CI, 20.8%, 42.8%) compared with round 1. Within round 2, there was a significant decrease in read-time when using ML support, estimated as 286 seconds (or 11%) quicker ( P = 0.0281), using regression analysis to account for reader experience, read round, and tumor type. Interobserver variance suggests moderate agreement, Cohen κ = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47, 0.81 (with ML), and Cohen κ = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47, 0.81 (without ML). CONCLUSIONS There was no evidence of a significant difference in per-patient sensitivity and specificity for detecting metastases or the primary tumor using concurrent ML compared with standard WB-MRI. Radiology read-times with or without ML support fell for round 2 reads compared with round 1, suggesting that readers familiarized themselves with the study reading method. During the second reading round, there was a significant reduction in reading time when using ML support.
Collapse
|
3
|
Rata M, Blackledge M, Scurr E, Winfield J, Koh DM, Dragan A, Candito A, King A, Rennie W, Gaba S, Suresh P, Malcolm P, Davis A, Nilak A, Shah A, Gandhi S, Albrizio M, Drury A, Roberts S, Jenner M, Brown S, Kaiser M, Messiou C. Implementation of Whole-Body MRI (MY-RADS) within the OPTIMUM/MUKnine multi-centre clinical trial for patients with myeloma. Insights Imaging 2022; 13:123. [PMID: 35900614 PMCID: PMC9334517 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-022-01253-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2021] [Accepted: 06/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Whole-body (WB) MRI, which includes diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and T1-w Dixon, permits sensitive detection of marrow disease in addition to qualitative and quantitative measurements of disease and response to treatment of bone marrow. We report on the first study to embed standardised WB-MRI within a prospective, multi-centre myeloma clinical trial (IMAGIMM trial, sub-study of OPTIMUM/MUKnine) to explore the use of WB-MRI to detect minimal residual disease after treatment. METHODS The standardised MY-RADS WB-MRI protocol was set up on a local 1.5 T scanner. An imaging manual describing the MR protocol, quality assurance/control procedures and data transfer was produced and provided to sites. For non-identical scanners (different vendor or magnet strength), site visits from our physics team were organised to support protocol optimisation. The site qualification process included review of phantom and volunteer data acquired at each site and a teleconference to brief the multidisciplinary team. Image quality of initial patients at each site was assessed. RESULTS WB-MRI was successfully set up at 12 UK sites involving 3 vendor systems and two field strengths. Four main protocols (1.5 T Siemens, 3 T Siemens, 1.5 T Philips and 3 T GE scanners) were generated. Scanner limitations (hardware and software) and scanning time constraint required protocol modifications for 4 sites. Nevertheless, shared methodology and imaging protocols enabled other centres to obtain images suitable for qualitative and quantitative analysis. CONCLUSIONS Standardised WB-MRI protocols can be implemented and supported in prospective multi-centre clinical trials. Trial registration NCT03188172 clinicaltrials.gov; registration date 15th June 2017 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT03188172.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mihaela Rata
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Downs Road, SM2 5PT, Sutton, London, UK.
| | - Matthew Blackledge
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Downs Road, SM2 5PT, Sutton, London, UK
| | - Erica Scurr
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Downs Road, SM2 5PT, Sutton, London, UK
| | - Jessica Winfield
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Downs Road, SM2 5PT, Sutton, London, UK
| | - Dow-Mu Koh
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Downs Road, SM2 5PT, Sutton, London, UK
| | - Alina Dragan
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Downs Road, SM2 5PT, Sutton, London, UK
| | - Antonio Candito
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Downs Road, SM2 5PT, Sutton, London, UK
| | - Alexander King
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | | | - Suchi Gaba
- Royal Stoke University Hospital, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
| | - Priya Suresh
- University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Foundation Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - Paul Malcolm
- Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK
| | - Amy Davis
- Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, Epsom, UK
| | | | - Aarti Shah
- Basingstoke and North Hampshire Hospital, Basingstoke, UK
| | | | - Mauro Albrizio
- Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Arnold Drury
- Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bournemouth, UK
| | - Sadie Roberts
- University of Leeds Clinical Trial Research Unit, Leeds, UK
| | - Matthew Jenner
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Sarah Brown
- University of Leeds Clinical Trial Research Unit, Leeds, UK
| | - Martin Kaiser
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Downs Road, SM2 5PT, Sutton, London, UK
| | - Christina Messiou
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Downs Road, SM2 5PT, Sutton, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ingley KM, Wan S, Vöö S, Windsor R, Michelagnoli M, Saifuddin A, Strauss SJ. Is It Time to Call Time on Bone Marrow Biopsy for Staging Ewing Sarcoma (ES)? Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13133261. [PMID: 34209887 PMCID: PMC8267963 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13133261] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2021] [Revised: 06/23/2021] [Accepted: 06/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Ewing sarcoma (ES) is a rare primary bone cancer, usually found in children and adolescents, which can spread to the lungs, other bones and less commonly, the bone marrow. An accurate determination of the disease spread at baseline (staging) is important to establish prognosis, monitor treatment response and help with management decisions. There is no standard of care for staging ES, although the invasive bone marrow biopsy has traditionally been used to establish whether patients have bone marrow infiltration. Imaging techniques, including FDG-PET/CT and whole-body MRI (WB-MRI), have become established in staging other cancers with expanding use for staging ES. A number of studies have validated the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of these modalities for detecting bone and bone marrow metastases in ES. The main aim of this review was to examine the current literature for the use of FDG-PET/CT and WB-MRI in staging ES to determine whether a bone marrow biopsy is still needed and would influence the management of patients. Hereafter, a new staging algorithm for ES recommends WB-MRI and/or FDG-PET/CT without bone marrow biopsy as the standard of care for staging localised and metastatic ES. Abstract Primary malignant bone sarcomas are rare and Ewing sarcoma (ES), along with osteosarcoma, predominates in teenagers and young adults. The well-established multimodality treatment incorporates systemic chemotherapy with local control in the form of surgery, with or without radiation. The presence and extent of metastases at diagnosis remains the most important prognostic factor in determining patient outcome; patients with skeletal metastases or bone marrow infiltration having a significantly worse outcome than those with lung metastases alone. There is, however, no accepted staging algorithm for ES. Large cooperative groups and national guidelines continue to advocate bone marrow biopsy (BMB) for staging but functional imaging techniques, such as 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) with computerised tomography (CT) have been increasingly used for staging cancers and whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) for staging skeletal metastases. This review outlines the current literature, from which we conclude that BMB is no longer required for the staging of ES as it does not influence the standard of care management. BMB may, however, provide prognostic information and insights into the biology of ES in selected patients on prospective clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katrina M. Ingley
- The London Sarcoma Service, University College London Hospitals Foundation Trusts, London NW1 2BU, UK; (K.M.I.); (R.W.); (M.M.)
| | - Simon Wan
- Institute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London NW1 2BU, UK; (S.W.); (S.V.)
| | - Stefan Vöö
- Institute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London NW1 2BU, UK; (S.W.); (S.V.)
- Biomedical Research Centre, Inflammation, Immunity and Immunotherapeutics, University College London Hospital, London NW1 2BU, UK
| | - Rachael Windsor
- The London Sarcoma Service, University College London Hospitals Foundation Trusts, London NW1 2BU, UK; (K.M.I.); (R.W.); (M.M.)
| | - Maria Michelagnoli
- The London Sarcoma Service, University College London Hospitals Foundation Trusts, London NW1 2BU, UK; (K.M.I.); (R.W.); (M.M.)
| | - Asif Saifuddin
- Department of Radiology, The Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust, Brockley Hill, Stanmore, London HA7 4LP, UK;
| | - Sandra J. Strauss
- The London Sarcoma Service, University College London Hospitals Foundation Trusts, London NW1 2BU, UK; (K.M.I.); (R.W.); (M.M.)
- UCL Cancer Institute, University College, London WC1E 6DD, UK
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Hong GS, Chae EJ, Ryu JS, Chae SY, Lee HS, Yoon DH, Suh C. Assessment of naive indolent lymphoma using whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging and T2-weighted MRI: results of a prospective study in 30 patients. Cancer Imaging 2021; 21:5. [PMID: 33413685 PMCID: PMC7791993 DOI: 10.1186/s40644-020-00371-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2020] [Accepted: 12/11/2020] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background We prospectively evaluated the diagnostic utility of whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging with background body signal suppression and T2-weighted short-tau inversion recovery MRI (WB-DWIBS/STIR) for the pretherapeutic staging of indolent lymphoma in 30 patients. Methods This prospective study included 30 treatment-naive patients with indolent lymphomas who underwent WB-DWIBS/STIR and conventional imaging workup plus biopsy. The pretherapeutic staging agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of WB-DWIBS/STIR were investigated with reference to the multimodality and multidisciplinary consensus review for nodal and extranodal lesions excluding bone marrow. Results In the pretherapeutic staging, WB-DWIBS/STIR showed very good agreement (κ = 0.96; confidence interval [CI], 0.88–1.00), high sensitivity (93.4–95.1%), and high specificity (99.0–99.4%) for the whole-body regions. These results were similar to those of 18F-FDG-PET/CT, except for the sensitivity for extranodal lesions. For extranodal lesions, WB-DWIBS/STIR showed higher sensitivity compared to 18F-FDG-PET/CT for the whole-body regions (94.9–96.8% vs. 79.6–86.3%, P = 0.058). Conclusion WB-DWIBS/STIR is an effective modality for the pretherapeutic staging of indolent lymphoma, and it has benefits when evaluating extranodal lesions, compared with 18F-FDG-PET/CT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gil-Sun Hong
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Eun Jin Chae
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, South Korea.
| | - Jin-Sook Ryu
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Sun Young Chae
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Hyo Sang Lee
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Gangneung Asan Hospital, 38, Bangdong-gil, Sacheon-myeon, Gangneung, South Korea
| | - Dok Hyun Yoon
- Department of Oncology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Cheolwon Suh
- Department of Oncology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Isaac A, Lecouvet F, Dalili D, Fayad L, Pasoglou V, Papakonstantinou O, Ahlawat S, Messiou C, Weber MA, Padhani AR. Detection and Characterization of Musculoskeletal Cancer Using Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2020; 24:726-750. [PMID: 33307587 DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1719018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) is gradually being integrated into clinical pathways for the detection, characterization, and staging of malignant tumors including those arising in the musculoskeletal (MSK) system. Although further developments and research are needed, it is now recognized that WB-MRI enables reliable, sensitive, and specific detection and quantification of disease burden, with clinical applications for a variety of disease types and a particular application for skeletal involvement. Advances in imaging techniques now allow the reliable incorporation of WB-MRI into clinical pathways, and guidelines recommending its use are emerging. This review assesses the benefits, clinical applications, limitations, and future capabilities of WB-MRI in the context of other next-generation imaging modalities, as a qualitative and quantitative tool for the detection and characterization of skeletal and soft tissue MSK malignancies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda Isaac
- School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, Kings College London, United Kingdom.,Guy's & St Thomas' Hospitals, London, United Kingdom
| | - Frederic Lecouvet
- Department of Radiology, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Danoob Dalili
- School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, Kings College London, United Kingdom.,Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Laura Fayad
- The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, John's Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Vasiliki Pasoglou
- Department of Radiology, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Olympia Papakonstantinou
- 2nd Department of Radiology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, "Attikon" Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Shivani Ahlawat
- The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, John's Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Christina Messiou
- The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, United Kingdom.,The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Marc-André Weber
- Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Paediatric Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Medical Centre Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Anwar R Padhani
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom.,Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Miles A, Evans REC, Taylor SA. Predictors of distress among patients undergoing staging investigations for suspected colorectal and lung cancer. PSYCHOL HEALTH MED 2020; 26:887-898. [PMID: 33232621 DOI: 10.1080/13548506.2020.1852477] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
People undergoing investigations for suspected cancer have to undergo a number of investigations before they know their full diagnosis and treatment plan. We examined predictors of distress among patients undergoing staging investigations for suspected colorectal or lung cancer. Patients were prospectively recruited to two multi-centre trials comparing WB-MRI with standard scans. Patients completed a questionnaire, administered at trial recruitment, measuring demographic and psychological variables (n = 129, 66 colorectal, 63 lung; median age 66.4, range: 31-89). Predictors of distress were analysed using logistic regression. Forty percent of patients reported high distress (a score of 4 or higher on the GHQ-12). Higher deprivation and greater intolerance of uncertainty (IU) predicted high distress in both unadjusted (low deprivation: OR 0.352, 95% CIs 0.144 to 0.860, p = 0.022; IU: OR 1.972, 95% CIs: 1.357 to 2.865, p < 0.001) and adjusted analyses (low deprivation: OR 0.243, 95% CIs 0.083 to 0.714, p = 0.010; IU: OR 2.231, 95% CIs 1.429 to 3.485, p < 0.001). Age, gender, presence of comorbid illness, cancer type, probable knowledge of cancer diagnosis, and a final diagnosis of cancer did not predict high distress. Future research should examine how to reduce distress in patients undergoing investigations for cancer, particularly among those who find uncertainty difficult to manage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Miles
- Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck University of London, London, UK
| | - Ruth E C Evans
- Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck University of London, London, UK
| | - Stuart A Taylor
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Miles A, Evans REC, Halligan S, Beare S, Bridgewater J, Goh V, Janes SM, Navani N, Oliver A, Morton A, Morris S, Rockall A, Taylor SA. Predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) or CT/ PET-CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2020; 64:537-545. [PMID: 32410378 PMCID: PMC8425331 DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.13038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2020] [Accepted: 03/27/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) may be more efficient in staging cancers, but can be harder for patients to tolerate. We examined predictors of patient preference for WB-MRI vs. CT/ PET-CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer. METHODS Patients recruited prospectively to two multicentre trials comparing diagnostic accuracy of WB-MRI with standard staging scans were sent two questionnaires: the first, administered at trial registration, captured demographics, educational level and comorbidities; the second, administered after staging completion, measured emotional distress (GHQ-12), positive mood (PANAS), perceived scan burden, patients' beliefs about WB-MRI, and preference for either WB-MRI or CT (colorectal trial), WB-MRI or PET-CT (lung trial). Preference for WB-MRI or CT/ PET-CT was analysed using logistic regression. RESULTS Baseline and post-staging questionnaires were completed by 97 and 107 patients, respectively. Overall, 56/107 (52%) preferred WB-MRI over standard scans and were more likely to have no additional comorbidities, higher positive mood, greater awareness of potential benefits of WB-MRI and lower levels of perceived WB-MRI scan burden. In adjusted analyses, only awareness of potential WB-MRI benefits remained a significant predictor (OR: 1.516, 95% CIs 1.006-2.284, P = 0.047). Knowledge that WB-MRI does not use radiation predicted preference (adjusted OR: 3.018, 95% CIs 1.099-8.288, P = 0.032), although only 45/107 (42%) patients were aware of this attribute. CONCLUSIONS A small majority of patients undergoing staging of colorectal or lung cancer prefer WB-MRI to CT/ PET-CT. Raising awareness of the potential benefits of WB-MRI, notably lack of ionizing radiation, could influence preference.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Miles
- Department of Psychological SciencesBirkbeckUniversity of LondonLondonUK
| | - Ruth EC Evans
- Department of Psychological SciencesBirkbeckUniversity of LondonLondonUK
| | - Steve Halligan
- Centre for Medical ImagingUniversity College LondonCharles Bell HouseUK
| | - Sandy Beare
- Cancer Research UKUniversity College London Clinical Trials CentreLondonUK
| | | | - Vicky Goh
- Cancer ImagingSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging SciencesKing’s College LondonStrand, LondonUK
| | - Sam M Janes
- Lungs for Living Research CentreUCL RespiratoryDivision of MedicineUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Neal Navani
- Department of Thoracic MedicineUCLH and Lungs for Living Research CentreUCL RespiratoryUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Alfred Oliver
- Cancer patient representativesc/o National Cancer Research InstituteLondonUK
| | - Alison Morton
- Cancer patient representativesc/o National Cancer Research InstituteLondonUK
| | - Steve Morris
- Research Department of Applied Health ResearchUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Andrea Rockall
- Department of Surgery and CancerImperial College LondonKensington, LondonUK
| | - Stuart A Taylor
- Centre for Medical ImagingUniversity College LondonCharles Bell HouseUK
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Evans R, Taylor S, Kalasthry J, Sakai N, Miles A, Aboagye A, Agoramoorthy L, Ahmed S, Amadi A, Anand G, Atkin G, Austria A, Ball S, Bazari F, Beable R, Beare S, Beedham H, Beeston T, Bharwani N, Bhatnagar G, Bhowmik A, Blakeway L, Blunt D, Boavida P, Boisfer D, Breen D, Bridgewater J, Burke S, Butawan R, Campbell Y, Chang E, Chao D, Chukundah S, Clarke C, Collins B, Collins C, Conteh V, Couture J, Crosbie J, Curtis H, Daniel A, Davis L, Desai K, Duggan M, Ellis S, Elton C, Engledow A, Everitt C, Ferdous S, Frow A, Furneaux M, Gibbons N, Glynne-Jones R, Gogbashian A, Goh V, Gourtsoyianni S, Green A, Green L, Green L, Groves A, Guthrie A, Hadley E, Halligan S, Hameeduddin A, Hanid G, Hans S, Hans B, Higginson A, Honeyfield L, Hughes H, Hughes J, Hurl L, Isaac E, Jackson M, Jalloh A, Janes S, Jannapureddy R, Jayme A, Johnson A, Johnson E, Julka P, Kalasthry J, Karapanagiotou E, Karp S, Kay C, Kellaway J, Khan S, Koh D, Light T, Limbu P, Lock S, Locke I, Loke T, Lowe A, Lucas N, Maheswaran S, Mallett S, Marwood E, McGowan J, Mckirdy F, Mills-Baldock T, Moon T, Morgan V, Morris S, Morton A, Nasseri S, Navani N, Nichols P, Norman C, Ntala E, Nunes A, Obichere A, O'Donohue J, Olaleye I, Oliver A, Onajobi A, O'Shaughnessy T, Padhani A, Pardoe H, Partridge W, Patel U, Perry K, Piga W, Prezzi D, Prior K, Punwani S, Pyers J, Rafiee H, Rahman F, Rajanpandian I, Ramesh S, Raouf S, Reczko K, Reinhardt A, Robinson D, Rockall A, Russell P, Sargus K, Scurr E, Shahabuddin K, Sharp A, Shepherd B, Shiu K, Sidhu H, Simcock I, Simeon C, Smith A, Smith D, Snell D, Spence J, Srirajaskanthan R, Stachini V, Stegner S, Stirling J, Strickland N, Tarver K, Teague J, Thaha M, Train M, Tulmuntaha S, Tunariu N, van Ree K, Verjee A, Wanstall C, Weir S, Wijeyekoon S, Wilson J, Wilson S, Win T, Woodrow L, Yu D. Patient deprivation and perceived scan burden negatively impact the quality of whole-body MRI. Clin Radiol 2020; 75:308-315. [PMID: 31836179 DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2019.10.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2019] [Accepted: 10/30/2019] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
AIM To evaluate the association between the image quality of cancer staging whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) and patient demographics, distress, and perceived scan burden. MATERIALS AND METHODS A sample of patients recruited prospectively to multicentre trials comparing WB-MRI with standard scans for staging lung and colorectal cancer were invited to complete two questionnaires. The baseline questionnaire, administered at recruitment, collated data on demographics, distress and co-morbidity. The follow-up questionnaire, completed after staging investigations, measured perceived WB-MRI scan burden (scored 1 low to 7 high). WB-MRI anatomical coverage, and technical quality was graded by a radiographic technician and grading combined to categorise the scan as "optimal", "sub-optimal" or "degraded". A radiologist categorised 30 scans to test interobserver agreement. Data were analysed using the chi-square, Fisher's exact, t-tests, and multinomial regression. RESULTS One hundred and fourteen patients were included in the study (53 lung, 61 colorectal; average age 65.3 years, SD=11.8; 66 men [57.9%]). Overall, 45.6% (n=52), scans were classified as "optimal" quality, 39.5% (n=45) "sub-optimal", and 14.9% (n=17) as "degraded". In adjusted analyses, greater deprivation level and higher patient-reported scan burden were both associated with a higher likelihood of having a sub-optimal versus an optimal scan (odds ratio [OR]: 4.465, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.454 to 13.709, p=0.009; OR: 1.987, CI: 1.153 to 3.425, p=0.013, respectively). None of the variables predicted the likelihood of having a degraded scan. CONCLUSIONS Deprivation and patients' perceived experience of the WB-MRI are related to image quality. Tailored protocols and individualised patient management before and during WB-MRI may improve image quality.
Collapse
|
10
|
Taylor SA, Mallett S, Miles A, Morris S, Quinn L, Clarke CS, Beare S, Bridgewater J, Goh V, Janes S, Koh DM, Morton A, Navani N, Oliver A, Padhani A, Punwani S, Rockall A, Halligan S. Whole-body MRI compared with standard pathways for staging metastatic disease in lung and colorectal cancer: the Streamline diagnostic accuracy studies. Health Technol Assess 2019; 23:1-270. [PMID: 31855148 PMCID: PMC6936168 DOI: 10.3310/hta23660] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging is advocated as an alternative to standard pathways for staging cancer. OBJECTIVES The objectives were to compare diagnostic accuracy, efficiency, patient acceptability, observer variability and cost-effectiveness of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and standard pathways in staging newly diagnosed non-small-cell lung cancer (Streamline L) and colorectal cancer (Streamline C). DESIGN The design was a prospective multicentre cohort study. SETTING The setting was 16 NHS hospitals. PARTICIPANTS Consecutive patients aged ≥ 18 years with histologically proven or suspected colorectal (Streamline C) or non-small-cell lung cancer (Streamline L). INTERVENTIONS Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging. Standard staging investigations (e.g. computed tomography and positron emission tomography-computed tomography). REFERENCE STANDARD Consensus panel decision using 12-month follow-up data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was per-patient sensitivity difference between whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and standard staging pathways for metastasis. Secondary outcomes included differences in specificity, the nature of the first major treatment decision, time and number of tests to complete staging, patient experience and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS Streamline C - 299 participants were included. Per-patient sensitivity for metastatic disease was 67% (95% confidence interval 56% to 78%) and 63% (95% confidence interval 51% to 74%) for whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and standard pathways, respectively, a difference in sensitivity of 4% (95% confidence interval -5% to 13%; p = 0.51). Specificity was 95% (95% confidence interval 92% to 97%) and 93% (95% confidence interval 90% to 96%) respectively, a difference of 2% (95% confidence interval -2% to 6%). Pathway treatment decisions agreed with the multidisciplinary team treatment decision in 96% and 95% of cases, respectively, a difference of 1% (95% confidence interval -2% to 4%). Time for staging was 8 days (95% confidence interval 6 to 9 days) and 13 days (95% confidence interval 11 to 15 days) for whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and standard pathways, respectively, a difference of 5 days (95% confidence interval 3 to 7 days). The whole-body magnetic resonance imaging pathway was cheaper than the standard staging pathway: £216 (95% confidence interval £211 to £221) versus £285 (95% confidence interval £260 to £310). Streamline L - 187 participants were included. Per-patient sensitivity for metastatic disease was 50% (95% confidence interval 37% to 63%) and 54% (95% confidence interval 41% to 67%) for whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and standard pathways, respectively, a difference in sensitivity of 4% (95% confidence interval -7% to 15%; p = 0.73). Specificity was 93% (95% confidence interval 88% to 96%) and 95% (95% confidence interval 91% to 98%), respectively, a difference of 2% (95% confidence interval -2% to 7%). Pathway treatment decisions agreed with the multidisciplinary team treatment decision in 98% and 99% of cases, respectively, a difference of 1% (95% confidence interval -2% to 4%). Time for staging was 13 days (95% confidence interval 12 to 14 days) and 19 days (95% confidence interval 17 to 21 days) for whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and standard pathways, respectively, a difference of 6 days (95% confidence interval 4 to 8 days). The whole-body magnetic resonance imaging pathway was cheaper than the standard staging pathway: £317 (95% confidence interval £273 to £361) versus £620 (95% confidence interval £574 to £666). Participants generally found whole-body magnetic resonance imaging more burdensome than standard imaging but most participants preferred the whole-body magnetic resonance imaging staging pathway if it reduced time to staging and/or number of tests. LIMITATIONS Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging was interpreted by practitioners blinded to other clinical data, which may not fully reflect how it is used in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS In colorectal and non-small-cell lung cancer, the whole-body magnetic resonance imaging staging pathway has similar accuracy to standard staging pathways, is generally preferred by patients, improves staging efficiency and has lower staging costs. Future work should address the utility of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for treatment response assessment. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN43958015 and ISRCTN50436483. FUNDING This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 66. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stuart A Taylor
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Susan Mallett
- Institute of Applied Health Research, NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Anne Miles
- Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, London, UK
| | - Stephen Morris
- Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Laura Quinn
- Institute of Applied Health Research, NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Caroline S Clarke
- Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, and Priment Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK
| | - Sandy Beare
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Vicky Goh
- Department of Cancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Sam Janes
- Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK
| | - Dow-Mu Koh
- Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK
| | - Alison Morton
- c/o Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Neal Navani
- Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK
| | - Alfred Oliver
- c/o Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Anwar Padhani
- Mount Vernon Centre for Cancer Treatment, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, UK
| | - Shonit Punwani
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Andrea Rockall
- Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Steve Halligan
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Adeleke S, Latifoltojar A, Sidhu H, Galazi M, Shah TT, Clemente J, Davda R, Payne HA, Chouhan MD, Lioumi M, Chua S, Freeman A, Rodriguez-Justo M, Coolen A, Vadgama S, Morris S, Cook GJ, Bomanji J, Arya M, Chowdhury S, Wan S, Haroon A, Ng T, Ahmed HU, Punwani S. Localising occult prostate cancer metastasis with advanced imaging techniques (LOCATE trial): a prospective cohort, observational diagnostic accuracy trial investigating whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in radio-recurrent prostate cancer. BMC Med Imaging 2019; 19:90. [PMID: 31730466 PMCID: PMC6858718 DOI: 10.1186/s12880-019-0380-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/23/2019] [Accepted: 09/13/2019] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Accurate whole-body staging following biochemical relapse in prostate cancer is vital in determining the optimum disease management. Current imaging guidelines recommend various imaging platforms such as computed tomography (CT), Technetium 99 m (99mTc) bone scan and 18F-choline and recently 68Ga-PSMA positron emission tomography (PET) for the evaluation of the extent of disease. Such approach requires multiple hospital attendances and can be time and resource intensive. Recently, whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) has been used in a single visit scanning session for several malignancies, including prostate cancer, with promising results, providing similar accuracy compared to the combined conventional imaging techniques. The LOCATE trial aims to investigate the application of WB-MRI for re-staging of patients with biochemical relapse (BCR) following external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy in patients with prostate cancer. METHODS/DESIGN The LOCATE trial is a prospective cohort, multi-centre, non-randomised, diagnostic accuracy study comparing WB-MRI and conventional imaging. Eligible patients will undergo WB-MRI in addition to conventional imaging investigations at the time of BCR and will be asked to attend a second WB-MRI exam, 12-months following the initial scan. WB-MRI results will be compared to an enhanced reference standard comprising all the initial, follow-up imaging and non-imaging investigations. The diagnostic performance (sensitivity and specificity analysis) of WB-MRI for re-staging of BCR will be investigated against the enhanced reference standard on a per-patient basis. An economic analysis of WB-MRI compared to conventional imaging pathways will be performed to inform the cost-effectiveness of the WB-MRI imaging pathway. Additionally, an exploratory sub-study will be performed on blood samples and exosome-derived human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) dimer measurements will be taken to investigate its significance in this cohort. DISCUSSION The LOCATE trial will compare WB-MRI versus the conventional imaging pathway including its cost-effectiveness, therefore informing the most accurate and efficient imaging pathway. TRIAL REGISTRATION LOCATE trial was registered on ClinicalTrial.gov on 18th of October 2016 with registration reference number NCT02935816.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sola Adeleke
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, 2nd floor Charles Bell house, 43-45 Foley Street, London, W1W 7TS UK
| | - Arash Latifoltojar
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, 2nd floor Charles Bell house, 43-45 Foley Street, London, W1W 7TS UK
| | - Harbir Sidhu
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, 2nd floor Charles Bell house, 43-45 Foley Street, London, W1W 7TS UK
- Department of Radiology, University College London Hospital, London, 235 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BU UK
| | - Myria Galazi
- Molecular Oncology Group, University College London, Cancer Institute, Paul O’Gorman Building, 72 Huntley Street, London, WC1E 6DD UK
| | - Taimur T. Shah
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, 4th floor, 21 University Street, London, WC1E UK
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Department of Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Joey Clemente
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, 2nd floor Charles Bell house, 43-45 Foley Street, London, W1W 7TS UK
| | - Reena Davda
- Oncology Department, University College London Hospital, 235 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BU UK
| | - Heather Ann Payne
- Oncology Department, University College London Hospital, 235 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BU UK
| | - Manil D. Chouhan
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, 2nd floor Charles Bell house, 43-45 Foley Street, London, W1W 7TS UK
- Department of Radiology, University College London Hospital, London, 235 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BU UK
| | - Maria Lioumi
- Comprehensive Cancer Imaging Centre (CCIC), King’s College, London, New Hunt’s House, Guy’s Campus, London, SE1 1UL UK
| | - Sue Chua
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Down’s Road, Sutton, SM2 5PT UK
| | - Alex Freeman
- Histopathology Department, University College London Hospital, 4th Floor, Rockefeller Building University Street, London, WC1 6DE UK
| | - Manuel Rodriguez-Justo
- Histopathology Department, University College London Hospital, 4th Floor, Rockefeller Building University Street, London, WC1 6DE UK
| | - Anthony Coolen
- Institute for Mathematical and Molecular Biomedicine, King’s College London, Hodgkin Building, Guy’s Campus, London, SE1 1UL UK
| | - Sachin Vadgama
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, Fitzrovia, London, WC1E 7HB UK
| | - Steve Morris
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, Fitzrovia, London, WC1E 7HB UK
| | - Gary J. Cook
- Department of Cancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, 4th Floor, Lambeth Wing St. Thomas’ Hospital, London, SE1 7EH UK
| | - Jamshed Bomanji
- Institute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London Hospital, 5th Floor Tower, 235 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BU UK
| | - Manit Arya
- Urology Department, University College Hospital, Westmoreland Street, 16-18 Westmoreland Street, London, W1G 8PH UK
| | - Simon Chowdhury
- Oncology Department, Guy’s and St. Thomas’ Hospital, Westminster Bridge road, Lambeth, London, SE1 7EH UK
| | - Simon Wan
- Institute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London Hospital, 5th Floor Tower, 235 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BU UK
| | - Athar Haroon
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, West Smithfield, London, EC1A 7BE UK
| | - Tony Ng
- Molecular Oncology Group, University College London, Cancer Institute, Paul O’Gorman Building, 72 Huntley Street, London, WC1E 6DD UK
| | - Hashim Uddin Ahmed
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Urology Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, W2 1NY UK
| | - Shonit Punwani
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, 2nd floor Charles Bell house, 43-45 Foley Street, London, W1W 7TS UK
- Department of Radiology, University College London Hospital, London, 235 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BU UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Miles A, Taylor SA, Evans REC, Halligan S, Beare S, Bridgewater J, Goh V, Janes S, Navani N, Oliver A, Morton A, Rockall A, Clarke CS, Morris S. Patient preferences for whole-body MRI or conventional staging pathways in lung and colorectal cancer: a discrete choice experiment. Eur Radiol 2019; 29:3889-3900. [PMID: 30937589 PMCID: PMC6554244 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06153-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2018] [Revised: 02/22/2019] [Accepted: 03/11/2019] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine the importance placed by patients on attributes associated with whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) and standard cancer staging pathways and ascertain drivers of preference. METHODS Patients recruited to two multi-centre diagnostic accuracy trials comparing WB-MRI with standard staging pathways in lung and colorectal cancer were invited to complete a discrete choice experiment (DCE), choosing between a series of alternate pathways in which 6 attributes (accuracy, time to diagnosis, scan duration, whole-body enclosure, radiation exposure, total scan number) were varied systematically. Data were analysed using a conditional logit regression model and marginal rates of substitution computed. The relative importance of each attribute and probabilities of choosing WB-MRI-based pathways were estimated. RESULTS A total of 138 patients (mean age 65, 61% male, lung n = 72, colorectal n = 66) participated (May 2015 to September 2016). Lung cancer patients valued time to diagnosis most highly, followed by accuracy, radiation exposure, number of scans, and time in the scanner. Colorectal cancer patients valued accuracy most highly, followed by time to diagnosis, radiation exposure, and number of scans. Patients were willing to wait 0.29 (lung) and 0.45 (colorectal) weeks for a 1% increase in pathway accuracy. Patients preferred WB-MRI-based pathways (probability 0.64 [lung], 0.66 [colorectal]) if they were equivalent in accuracy, total scan number, and time to diagnosis compared with a standard staging pathway. CONCLUSIONS Staging pathways based on first-line WB-MRI are preferred by the majority of patients if they at least match standard pathways for diagnostic accuracy, time to diagnosis, and total scan number. KEY POINTS • WB-MRI staging pathways are preferred to standard pathways by the majority of patients provided they at least match standard staging pathways for accuracy, total scan number, and time to diagnosis. • For patients with lung cancer, time to diagnosis was the attribute valued most highly, followed by accuracy, radiation dose, number of additional scans, and time in a scanner. Preference for patients with colorectal cancer was similar. • Most (63%) patients were willing to trade attributes, such as faster diagnosis, for improvements in pathway accuracy and reduced radiation exposure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Miles
- Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, Malet Street, London, WC1E 7HX, UK.
| | - Stuart A Taylor
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London, W1W 7TS, UK
| | - Ruth E C Evans
- Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, Malet Street, London, WC1E 7HX, UK
| | - Steve Halligan
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London, W1W 7TS, UK
| | - Sandy Beare
- Cancer Research UK and University College London Clinical Trials Centre, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 4TJ, UK
| | - John Bridgewater
- UCL Cancer Institute, Paul O Gorman Building, 72 Huntley Street London, London, WC1E 6DD, UK
| | - Vicky Goh
- Cancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, Strand, London, WC2R 2LS, UK
| | - Sam Janes
- Lungs for Living Research Centre, Division of Medicine, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Neil Navani
- Department of Thoracic Medicine, UCLH and Lungs for Living Research Centre, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Alf Oliver
- National Cancer Research Institute, Angel Building, 407 St John Street, London, EC1V 4AD, UK
| | - Alison Morton
- National Cancer Research Institute, Angel Building, 407 St John Street, London, EC1V 4AD, UK
| | - Andrea Rockall
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Kensington, London, SW7 2AZ, UK
- Department of Radiology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Hospital Trust, Fulham Road, London, SW3 6JJ, UK
| | - Caroline S Clarke
- Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, Upper Third Floor, UCL Medical School (Royal Free Campus), Rowland Hill Street, London, NW3 2PF, UK
| | - Stephen Morris
- Research Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Taylor SA, Mallett S, Beare S, Bhatnagar G, Blunt D, Boavida P, Bridgewater J, Clarke CS, Duggan M, Ellis S, Glynne-Jones R, Goh V, Groves AM, Hameeduddin A, Janes SM, Johnston EW, Koh DM, Miles A, Morris S, Morton A, Navani N, O'Donohue J, Oliver A, Padhani AR, Pardoe H, Patel U, Punwani S, Quinn L, Rafiee H, Reczko K, Rockall AG, Shahabuddin K, Sidhu HS, Teague J, Thaha MA, Train M, van Ree K, Wijeyekoon S, Halligan S. Diagnostic accuracy of whole-body MRI versus standard imaging pathways for metastatic disease in newly diagnosed colorectal cancer: the prospective Streamline C trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 4:529-537. [PMID: 31080095 PMCID: PMC6547166 DOI: 10.1016/s2468-1253(19)30056-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2019] [Revised: 02/11/2019] [Accepted: 02/11/2019] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) could be an alternative to multimodality staging of colorectal cancer, but its diagnostic accuracy, effect on staging times, number of tests needed, cost, and effect on treatment decisions are unknown. We aimed to prospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy and efficiency of WB-MRI-based staging pathways with standard pathways in colorectal cancer. METHODS The Streamline C trial was a prospective, multicentre trial done in 16 hospitals in England. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer. Exclusion criteria were severe systemic disease, pregnancy, contraindications to MRI, or polyp cancer. Patients underwent WB-MRI, the result of which was withheld until standard staging investigations were complete and the first treatment decision made. The multidisciplinary team recorded its treatment decision based on standard investigations, then on the WB-MRI staging pathway (WB-MRI plus additional tests generated), and finally on all tests. The primary outcome was difference in per-patient sensitivity for metastases between standard and WB-MRI staging pathways against a consensus reference standard at 12 months, in the per-protocol population. Secondary outcomes were difference in per-patient specificity for metastatic disease detection between standard and WB-MRI staging pathways, differences in treatment decisions, staging efficiency (time taken, test number, and costs), and per-organ sensitivity and specificity for metastases and per-patient agreement for local T and N stage. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry, number ISRCTN43958015, and is complete. FINDINGS Between March 26, 2013, and Aug 19, 2016, 1020 patients were screened for eligibility. 370 patients were recruited, 299 of whom completed the trial; 68 (23%) had metastasis at baseline. Pathway sensitivity was 67% (95% CI 56 to 78) for WB-MRI and 63% (51 to 74) for standard pathways, a difference in sensitivity of 4% (-5 to 13, p=0·51). No adverse events related to imaging were reported. Specificity did not differ between WB-MRI (95% [95% CI 92-97]) and standard pathways (93% [90-96], p=0·48). Agreement with the multidisciplinary team's final treatment decision was 96% for WB-MRI and 95% for the standard pathway. Time to complete staging was shorter for WB-MRI (median, 8 days [IQR 6-9]) than for the standard pathway (13 days [11-15]); a 5-day (3-7) difference. WB-MRI required fewer tests (median, one [95% CI 1 to 1]) than did standard pathways (two [2 to 2]), a difference of one (1 to 1). Mean per-patient staging costs were £216 (95% CI 211-221) for WB-MRI and £285 (260-310) for standard pathways. INTERPRETATION WB-MRI staging pathways have similar accuracy to standard pathways and reduce the number of tests needed, staging time, and cost. FUNDING UK National Institute for Health Research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stuart A Taylor
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK.
| | - Sue Mallett
- Institute of Applied Health Research, NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK
| | - Sandy Beare
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Dominic Blunt
- Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Peter Boavida
- Department of Radiology, Homerton Hospital, London, UK
| | | | - Caroline S Clarke
- Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Marian Duggan
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK
| | - Steve Ellis
- Department of Radiology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Robert Glynne-Jones
- Mount Vernon Centre for Cancer Treatment, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, UK
| | - Vicky Goh
- Department of Cancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, King's Health Partners, London, UK
| | - Ashley M Groves
- Institute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Sam M Janes
- Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK; Department of Thoracic Medicine, University College London Hospitals, UK
| | | | - Dow-Mu Koh
- Department of Radiology, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey, UK
| | - Anne Miles
- Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck University of London, London, UK
| | - Stephen Morris
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Alison Morton
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Neal Navani
- Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK; Department of Thoracic Medicine, University College London Hospitals, UK
| | - John O'Donohue
- Department of Gastroenterology, Lewisham Hospital, London, UK
| | - Alfred Oliver
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Anwar R Padhani
- Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK
| | - Helen Pardoe
- Department of Surgery, Homerton Hospital, London, UK
| | - Uday Patel
- Intestinal Imaging Centre, St Mark's Hospital, LNWUH NHS Trust, Harrow, UK
| | - Shonit Punwani
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Laura Quinn
- Institute of Applied Health Research, NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK
| | - Hameed Rafiee
- Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, UK
| | - Krystyna Reczko
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK
| | - Andrea G Rockall
- Department of Radiology, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK; Department of Cancer and Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Harbir S Sidhu
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jonathan Teague
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK
| | - Mohamed A Thaha
- Blizard Institute, National Bowel Research Centre, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK; Department of Surgery, Barts Health NHS Trust, The Royal London Hospital, London, UK
| | - Matthew Train
- Department of Radiology, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Katherine van Ree
- Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Steve Halligan
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Taylor SA, Mallett S, Ball S, Beare S, Bhatnagar G, Bhowmik A, Boavida P, Bridgewater J, Clarke CS, Duggan M, Ellis S, Glynne-Jones R, Goh V, Groves AM, Hameeduddin A, Janes SM, Johnston EW, Koh DM, Lock S, Miles A, Morris S, Morton A, Navani N, Oliver A, O'Shaughnessy T, Padhani AR, Prezzi D, Punwani S, Quinn L, Rafiee H, Reczko K, Rockall AG, Russell P, Sidhu HS, Strickland N, Tarver K, Teague J, Halligan S. Diagnostic accuracy of whole-body MRI versus standard imaging pathways for metastatic disease in newly diagnosed non-small-cell lung cancer: the prospective Streamline L trial. THE LANCET. RESPIRATORY MEDICINE 2019; 7:523-532. [PMID: 31080129 PMCID: PMC6529610 DOI: 10.1016/s2213-2600(19)30090-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2019] [Revised: 02/11/2019] [Accepted: 02/12/2019] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) could be an alternative to multi-modality staging of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its diagnostic accuracy, effect on staging times, number of tests needed, cost, and effect on treatment decisions are unknown. We aimed to prospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy and efficiency of WB-MRI-based staging pathways with standard pathways in NSCLC. METHODS The Streamline L trial was a prospective, multicentre trial done in 16 hospitals in England. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, with newly diagnosed NSCLC that was potentially radically treatable on diagnostic chest CT (defined as stage IIIb or less). Exclusion criteria were severe systemic disease, pregnancy, contraindications to MRI, or histologies other than NSCLC. Patients underwent WB-MRI, the result of which was withheld until standard staging investigations were complete and the first treatment decision made. The multidisciplinary team recorded its treatment decision based on standard investigations, then on the WB-MRI staging pathway (WB-MRI plus additional tests generated), and finally on all tests. The primary outcome was difference in per-patient sensitivity for metastases between standard and WB-MRI staging pathways against a consensus reference standard at 12 months, in the per-protocol population. Secondary outcomes were difference in per-patient specificity for metastatic disease detection between standard and WB-MRI staging pathways, differences in treatment decisions, staging efficiency (time taken, test number, and costs) and per-organ sensitivity and specificity for metastases and per-patient agreement for local T and N stage. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry, number ISRCTN50436483, and is complete. FINDINGS Between Feb 26, 2013, and Sept 5, 2016, 976 patients were screened for eligibility. 353 patients were recruited, 187 of whom completed the trial; 52 (28%) had metastasis at baseline. Pathway sensitivity was 50% (95% CI 37-63) for WB-MRI and 54% (41-67) for standard pathways, a difference of 4% (-7 to 15, p=0·73). No adverse events related to imaging were reported. Specificity did not differ between WB-MRI (93% [88-96]) and standard pathways (95% [91-98], p=0·45). Agreement with the multidisciplinary team's final treatment decision was 98% for WB-MRI and 99% for the standard pathway. Time to complete staging was shorter for WB-MRI (13 days [12-14]) than for the standard pathway (19 days [17-21]); a 6-day (4-8) difference. The number of tests required was similar WB-MRI (one [1-1]) and standard pathways (one [1-2]). Mean per-patient costs were £317 (273-361) for WBI-MRI and £620 (574-666) for standard pathways. INTERPRETATION WB-MRI staging pathways have similar accuracy to standard pathways, and reduce the staging time and costs. FUNDING UK National Institute for Health Research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stuart A Taylor
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK.
| | - Sue Mallett
- Institute of Applied Health Research, NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK
| | - Simon Ball
- Barking, Havering, and Redbridge NHS Trust, Romford, UK
| | - Sandy Beare
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Angshu Bhowmik
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, Homerton University Hospital, London, UK
| | - Peter Boavida
- Department of Radiology, Homerton University Hospital, London, UK
| | | | - Caroline S Clarke
- Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Marian Duggan
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK
| | - Steve Ellis
- Department of Radiology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Robert Glynne-Jones
- Mount Vernon Centre for Cancer Treatment, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, UK
| | - Vicky Goh
- Department of Cancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, King's Health Partners, London, UK
| | - Ashley M Groves
- Institute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Sam M Janes
- Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK; Department of Thoracic Medicine, University College London Hospitals, UK
| | | | - Dow-Mu Koh
- Department of Radiology, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey, UK
| | - Sara Lock
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, Whittington Hospital, London, UK
| | - Anne Miles
- Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck University of London, London, UK
| | - Stephen Morris
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Alison Morton
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Neal Navani
- Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK; Department of Thoracic Medicine, University College London Hospitals, UK
| | - Alfred Oliver
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Anwar R Padhani
- Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK
| | - David Prezzi
- Department of Cancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, King's Health Partners, London, UK; Department of Radiology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Shonit Punwani
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Laura Quinn
- Institute of Applied Health Research, NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK
| | - Hameed Rafiee
- Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, UK
| | - Krystyna Reczko
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK
| | - Andrea G Rockall
- Department of Imaging, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK; Department of Cancer and Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Peter Russell
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust, Harlow, UK
| | - Harbir S Sidhu
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Nicola Strickland
- Department of Imaging, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Jonathan Teague
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK
| | - Steve Halligan
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Machine learning in whole-body MRI: experiences and challenges from an applied study using multicentre data. Clin Radiol 2019; 74:346-356. [DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2019.01.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2018] [Accepted: 01/22/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|
16
|
Westerland OA, Pratt G, Kazmi M, El-Najjar I, Streetly M, Yong K, Morris M, Mehan R, Sambrook M, Hall-Craggs M, Silver D, Goh V. National survey of imaging practice for suspected or confirmed plasma cell malignancies. Br J Radiol 2018; 91:20180462. [PMID: 30102561 PMCID: PMC6319860 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20180462] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2018] [Revised: 07/29/2018] [Accepted: 08/07/2018] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cross-sectional imaging is now recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for patients with suspected and newly diagnosed myeloma instead of skeletal survey. The objectives of this study were: (1) To evaluate compliance of current UK imaging practice with reference to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence best-practice clinical guidelines for plasma cell malignancies. (2) To identify factors which may influence diagnostic imaging choices. METHODS: We conducted a national online survey to assess compliance with guidelines and to identify challenges to implementation (endorsed by Myeloma UK, UK Myeloma Forum and the British Society of Skeletal Radiologists). RESULTS: Responses were received from 31 district general and 28 teaching hospitals. For suspected and confirmed myeloma, skeletal survey remained the most frequent first-line imaging test (suspected myeloma 44.3%, confirmed myeloma 37.7%). Only 9.8 % of responders offered first-line whole body MRI. CONCLUSION: Significant challenges remain to standardisation of imaging practice in accordance with national best-practice guidelines. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first publication to date evaluating current UK imaging practice for assessing myeloma since the publication of new guidelines recommending use of advanced cross-sectional imaging techniques. Skeletal survey remains the most commonly performed first-line imaging test in patients with suspected or confirmed myeloma and this is largely due to resource limitations within radiology departments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olwen Amy Westerland
- Cancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Guy Pratt
- Clinical Haematology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | - Majid Kazmi
- Clinical Haematology, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Inas El-Najjar
- Clinical Haematology, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Matthew Streetly
- Clinical Haematology, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | | | | | - Rakesh Mehan
- British Society of Skeletal Radiologists, London, UK
| | | | | | - David Silver
- British Society of Skeletal Radiologists, London, UK
| | - Vicky Goh
- Cancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Novel imaging techniques in staging oesophageal cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2018; 36-37:17-25. [PMID: 30551852 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpg.2018.11.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2018] [Accepted: 11/19/2018] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
The survival of oesophageal cancer is poor as most patients present with advanced disease. Radiological staging of oesophageal cancer is complex but is fundamental to clinical management. Accurate staging investigations are vitally important to guide treatment decisions and optimise patient outcomes. A combination of baseline computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and positron emission tomography (PET) are currently used for initial treatment decisions. The potential value of these imaging modalities to re-stage disease, monitor response and alter treatment is currently being investigated. This review presents an essential update on the accuracy of oesophageal cancer staging investigations, their use in re-staging after neo-adjuvant therapy and introduces evolving imaging techniques, including novel biomarkers that have clinical potential in oesophageal cancer.
Collapse
|
18
|
A new type of gadodiamide-conjugated amphiphilic chitosan nanoparticle and its use for MR imaging with significantly enhanced contrastability. Carbohydr Polym 2018; 203:256-264. [PMID: 30318211 DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.09.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2018] [Revised: 07/27/2018] [Accepted: 09/17/2018] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been one of the most frequently-used diagnostic tools with high dimensional precision and positioning accuracy in clinical practices. To achieve contrast enhancement, utilization of high-efficient MR imaging contrast agents becomes a prime consideration and is indispensably reinforced the diagnosis precision, especially for the emerging precision medicine. Gadolinium (Gd)-based complexes has been widely used in current clinical MRI operations, however, numerous side effects were reported and highlighted in clinic. Those drawbacks render specific unmet needs to be clinically and technically improved with a new version of Gd-based compound. Here we report a newly-synthesized amphiphilic Gadodiamide-conjugated carboxymethyl-hexanoyl chitosan (termed as CHC-Gd) hybrid. The gadodiamide was selected is due to its smallest molecular size among other Gd-based complexes reported in literature, which assumed to give least influence on the resulting physicochemical properties such as colloidal stability, nanostructural evolution, and cytocompability, particularly self-assembly capability, of the resulting hybrid upon practical uses. Experimental outcomes showed a successful synthesis of the CHC-Gd hybrid using a one-pot synthesis protocol, where the gadodiamide complexes were covalently attached to the carboxyl groups along the CHC backbone. Self-assembly behavior can be observed to form a sphere-like nanoparticle of 100-200 nm in size as of amphiphilic native CHC macromolecule. Experimental outcomes indicated a largely improved cytocompatibility of the hybrid, compared with free Gd, suggesting the Gd+3 ions were well stabilized in the CHC nanostructure. Excellent contrastability in-vitro and in particular in vivo were measured, where for in-vivo test, a 10-40-folded reduction in dosage, compared with clinical Gd dose, was used and demonstrated a comparative-to-better imaging resolution and brightness. Therefore, from this preliminary investigation, a potential translation to clinical practice through the use of newly-synthesized amphiphilic CHC-Gd hybrid appears to be relatively promising.
Collapse
|
19
|
Whole-Body MR Imaging: The Novel, "Intrinsically Hybrid," Approach to Metastases, Myeloma, Lymphoma, in Bones and Beyond. PET Clin 2018; 13:505-522. [PMID: 30219185 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpet.2018.05.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Whole-body MR imaging (WB-MR imaging) has become a modality of choice for detecting bone metastases in multiple cancers, and bone marrow involvement by multiple myeloma or lymphoma. Combination of anatomic and functional sequences imparts an inherently hybrid dimension to this nonirradiating tool and extends the screening of malignancies outside the skeleton. WB-MR imaging outperforms bone scintigraphy and CT and offers an alternative to PET in many tumors by time of lesion detection and assessment of treatment response. Much work has been done to standardize procedures, optimize sequences, validate indications, confirm preliminary research into new applications, rendering clinical application more user-friendly.
Collapse
|
20
|
Evans RE, Taylor SA, Beare S, Halligan S, Morton A, Oliver A, Rockall A, Miles A. Perceived patient burden and acceptability of whole body MRI for staging lung and colorectal cancer; comparison with standard staging investigations. Br J Radiol 2018. [PMID: 29528257 PMCID: PMC6223281 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20170731] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate perceived patient burden and acceptability of whole body MRI (WB-MRI) compared to standard staging investigations, and identify predictors of reduced tolerance. Methods: Patients recruited to multicentre trials comparing WB-MRI with standard staging scans for lung and colorectal cancer were invited to complete two questionnaires: a baseline questionnaire at recruitment, measuring demographics, comorbidities, and distress; and a follow-up questionnaire after staging, measuring recovery time, comparative acceptability/satisfaction between WB-MRI and CT (colorectal cancer) and PET-CT (lung cancer), and perceived scan burden (scored 1, low; 7, high). Results: 115 patients (median age 66.3 years; 67 males) completed follow up and 103 baseline questionnaires. 69 (63.9%) reported “immediate” recovery from WB-MRI and 73 (65.2%) judged it “very acceptable”. Perceived WB-MRI burden was greater than for CT (p < 0.001) and PET-CT (p < 0.001). High distress and comorbidities were associated with greater WB-MRI burden in adjusted analyses, with deprivation only approaching significance (adjusted regression β = 0.223, p = 0.025; β = 0.191, p = 0.048; β = −0.186, p = 0.059 respectively). Age (p = 0.535), gender (p = 0.389), ethnicity (p = 0.081) and cancer type (p = 0.201) were not predictive of WB-MRI burden. Conclusion: WB-MRI is marginally less acceptable and more burdensome than standard scans, particularly for patients with pre-existing distress and comorbidities. Advances in knowledge: This research shows that WB-MRI scan burden, although low, is higher than for current staging modalities among patients with suspected colorectal or lung cancer. Psychological and physical comorbidities adversely impact on patient experience of WB-MRI. Patients with high distress or comorbid illness may need additional support to undergo a WB-MRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruth Ec Evans
- 1 Deparment of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London , London , UK
| | - Stuart A Taylor
- 2 Division of Medicine, Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London , London , UK
| | - Sandra Beare
- 3 Cancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre , London , UK
| | - Steve Halligan
- 2 Division of Medicine, Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London , London , UK
| | - Alison Morton
- 4 C/O National Cancer Research Institute, Angel Building , London , UK
| | - Alf Oliver
- 4 C/O National Cancer Research Institute, Angel Building , London , UK
| | - Andrea Rockall
- 5 Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Kensington , London , UK.,6 Department of Radiology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Hospital Trust , London , UK
| | - Anne Miles
- 1 Deparment of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London , London , UK
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Evans R, Taylor S, Janes S, Halligan S, Morton A, Navani N, Oliver A, Rockall A, Teague J, Miles A. Patient experience and perceived acceptability of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for staging colorectal and lung cancer compared with current staging scans: a qualitative study. BMJ Open 2017; 7:e016391. [PMID: 28882915 PMCID: PMC5588966 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016391] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2017] [Revised: 06/02/2017] [Accepted: 06/07/2017] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To describe the experience and acceptability of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) staging compared with standard scans among patients with highly suspected or known colorectal or lung cancer. DESIGN Qualitative study using one-to-one interviews with thematic analysis. SETTING Patients recruited from 10 hospitals in London, East and South East England between March 2013 and July 2014. PARTICIPANTS 51 patients (31 male, age range 40-89 years), with varying levels of social deprivation, were recruited consecutively from two parallel clinical trials comparing the diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of WB-MRI with standard scans for staging colorectal and lung cancer ('Streamline-C' and 'Streamline-L'). WB-MRI was offered as an additional scan as part of the trials. RESULTS In general WB-MRI presented a greater challenge than standard scans, although all but four patients completed the WB-MRI. Key challenges were enclosed space, noise and scan duration; reduced patient tolerance was associated with claustrophobia, pulmonary symptoms and existing comorbidities. Coping strategies facilitated scan tolerance and were grouped into (1) those intended to help with physical and emotional challenges, and (2) those focused on motivation to complete the scan, for example focusing on health benefit. Our study suggests that good staff communication could reduce anxiety and boost coping strategies. CONCLUSIONS Although WB-MRI was perceived as more challenging than standard scans, it was sufficiently acceptable and tolerated by most patients to potentially replace them if appropriate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN43958015 and ISRCTN50436483.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruth Evans
- Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Stuart Taylor
- Division of Medicine, Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Sam Janes
- Division of Medicine, Lungs for Living Research Centre, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Steve Halligan
- Division of Medicine, Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Alison Morton
- C/O National Cancer Research Institute, London, United Kingdom
| | - Neal Navani
- Division of Medicine, Lungs for Living Research Centre, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Alf Oliver
- C/O National Cancer Research Institute, London, United Kingdom
| | - Andrea Rockall
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Radiology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Jonathan Teague
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Clinical Trials Centre, London, United Kingdom
| | - Anne Miles
- Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck University of London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|