Disparities in Diagnostic Imaging for Initial Local Staging for Rectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the presence, quality, and timeliness of initial staging imaging for rectal cancer patients, and to evaluate demographic factors associated with disparities. METHODS: We conducted a chart review of consecutive rectal adenocarcinoma cancer registry cases from a single institution for the period from 2015 to 2020. We recorded whether initial staging MRI or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) was performed, and whether it was performed in or outside the institution. MRI quality was assessed based on compliance to the Society of Abdominal Radiology rectal cancer disease-focused panel protocol recommendations. The times between diagnosis and imaging were calculated. Patients' age, race, ethnicity, sex, body mass index, address, and primary payer were acquired from the electronic medical record. Descriptive analysis, odds ratios, and Student's t tests were used for analysis. RESULTS: Of 346 patients, 39% were female, and the average age was 59 years. A total of 93 patients (26.8%) had no initial staging MRI or endoscopic ultrasound. Of the 142 MRIs evaluated for image quality, 100 patient exams (72.4%) met the criteria for adequate quality. The mean time interval from diagnosis to imaging was 30.9 days. A lower likelihood of receiving initial local staging was associated with being of Hispanic ethnicity (P < .01), having Medicaid or no insurance (P < .01), and residing in a low-income census block (P < .01). Higher quality of imaging was associated with residence in a census block with high median income (P < 0.01), more recent diagnosis (P < .01), and MRI performed at the institution presented (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Although radiologic workup variability was found across all demographics, sociodemographic factors have an effect on local initial imaging of rectal cancer, emphasizing the need to improve image acquisition for underserved patients and improve quality standardization at low-volume centers.

Society of abdominal radiology survey of practice patterns in using LI-RADS treatment response criteria in the evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma post-locoregional treatment.

PURPOSE: To examine national trends in the adoption and use of the LI-RADS Treatment Response Algorithm. METHODS: Members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) Disease-Focused Panel (DFP) on LI-RADS Treatment Response (LR-TR) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) developed a 15-question survey which was distributed to radiologists at academic and private practice institutions around the USA and Canada. The survey focused on HCC-related practice patterns as well as the adoption and use of the LR-TR algorithm. RESULTS: Of 122 surveys distributed, a total of 76 radiologists responded (62%). Responders were predominantly from academic centers (85%). Nearly all (96%) participate in multidisciplinary hepatic tumor boards and most (67%) have an active liver transplant program. All responders' institutions perform locoregional therapy for HCC, including radiation-based therapy (TARE and SBRT). There was a preference for use of MRI over CT for follow-up after locoregional therapy. All responders were aware of the LR-TR algorithm and nearly all (92%) used the system in routine practice. Radiologists expressed a need for more visual aids related to the LR-TR system. Multiple respondents requested additional clarity within the LR-TR algorithm regarding the evolution of post-treatment radiation changes over time. CONCLUSION: Most survey participants use the LR-TR algorithm after locoregional therapy for HCC. Future iterations of the algorithm may benefit from increased clarity regarding response after radiation-based therapies. Educational materials should include more visual aids to improve reader understanding.

A Multicenter Assessment of Interreader Reliability of LI-RADS Version 2018 for MRI and CT.

Background Various limitations have impacted research evaluating reader agreement for Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS). Purpose To assess reader agreement of LI-RADS in an international multicenter multireader setting using scrollable images. Materials and Methods This retrospective study used deidentified clinical multiphase CT and MRI and reports with at least one untreated observation from six institutions and three countries; only qualifying examinations were submitted. Examination dates were October 2017 to August 2018 at the coordinating center. One untreated observation per examination was randomly selected using observation identifiers, and its clinically assigned features were extracted from the report. The corresponding LI-RADS version 2018 category was computed as a rescored clinical read. Each examination was randomly assigned to two of 43 research readers who independently scored the observation. Agreement for an ordinal modified four-category LI-RADS scale (LR-1, definitely benign; LR-2, probably benign; LR-3, intermediate probability of malignancy; LR-4, probably hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]; LR-5, definitely HCC; LR-M, probably malignant but not HCC specific; and LR-TIV, tumor in vein) was computed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Agreement was also computed for dichotomized malignancy (LR-4, LR-5, LR-M, and LR-TIV), LR-5, and LR-M. Agreement was compared between research-versus-research reads and research-versus-clinical reads. Results The study population consisted of 484 patients (mean age, 62 years ± 10 [SD]; 156 women; 93 CT examinations, 391 MRI examinations). ICCs for ordinal LI-RADS, dichotomized malignancy, LR-5, and LR-M were 0.68 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.73), 0.63 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.70), 0.58 (95% CI: 0.50, 0.66), and 0.46 (95% CI: 0.31, 0.61) respectively. Research-versus-research reader agreement was higher than research-versus-clinical agreement for modified four-category LI-RADS (ICC, 0.68 vs 0.62, respectively; P = .03) and for dichotomized malignancy (ICC, 0.63 vs 0.53, respectively; P = .005), but not for LR-5 (P = .14) or LR-M (P = .94). Conclusion There was moderate agreement for LI-RADS version 2018 overall. For some comparisons, research-versus-research reader agreement was higher than research-versus-clinical reader agreement, indicating differences between the clinical and research environments that warrant further study. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorials by Johnson and Galgano and Smith in this issue.

Revenue and Cost Analysis of a System Utilizing Natural Language Processing and a Nurse Coordinator for Radiology Follow-up Recommendations.

Radiology reports often contain recommendations for follow-up imaging, Provider adherence to these radiology recommendations can be incomplete, which may result in patient harm, lost revenue, or litigation. This study sought to perform a revenue assessment of a hybrid natural language processing (NLP) and human follow-up system. Reports generated from January 2020 to April 2021 that were indexed as overdue from follow-up recommendations by mPower Follow-Up Recommendation Algorithm (Nuance Communications Inc., Burlington, MA), were assessed for follow up and revenue. Follow-up exams completed because of the hybrid system were tabulated and given revenue amounts based on Medicare national reimbursement rates. These rates were then summated. A total of n =3011 patients were flagged via the mPower algorithm as having not received a timely follow-up indicated for procedure. Of these, n = 427 required the quality nurse to contact their healthcare provider to place orders. The follow-up imaging of these patients accounted for $62,937.66 of revenue. This revenue was calculated as higher than personnel cost (based on national average quality and safety nurse salary and time allotted on follow-ups). Our results indicate that a hybrid human-artificial intelligence follow-up system can be profitable, while potentially adding to patient safety. Our revenue figure likely significantly underestimates the true revenue obtained at our institution. This was due to the use of Medicare national reimbursement rates to calculate revenue, for the purposes of generalizability.

MRI assessment of rectal cancer response to neoadjuvant therapy: a multireader study.

OBJECTIVES: A watch and wait strategy with the goal of organ preservation is an emerging treatment paradigm for rectal cancer following neoadjuvant treatment. However, the selection of appropriate patients remains a challenge. Most previous efforts to measure the accuracy of MRI in assessing rectal cancer response used a small number of radiologists and did not report variability among them. METHODS: Twelve radiologists from 8 institutions assessed baseline and restaging MRI scans of 39 patients. The participating radiologists were asked to assess MRI features and to categorize the overall response as complete or incomplete. The reference standard was pathological complete response or a sustained clinical response for > 2 years. RESULTS: We measured the accuracy and described the interobserver variability of interpretation of rectal cancer response between radiologists at different medical centers. Overall accuracy was 64%, with a sensitivity of 65% for detecting complete response and specificity of 63% for detecting residual tumor. Interpretation of the overall response was more accurate than the interpretation of any individual feature. Variability of interpretation was dependent on the patient and imaging feature investigated. In general, variability and accuracy were inversely correlated. CONCLUSIONS: MRI-based evaluation of response at restaging is insufficiently accurate and has substantial variability of interpretation. Although some patients' response to neoadjuvant treatment on MRI may be easily recognizable, as seen by high accuracy and low variability, that is not the case for most patients. KEY POINTS: • The overall accuracy of MRI-based response assessment is low and radiologists differed in their interpretation of key imaging features. • Some patients' scans were interpreted with high accuracy and low variability, suggesting that these patients' pattern of response is easier to interpret. • The most accurate assessments were those of the overall response, which took into consideration both T2W and DWI sequences and the assessment of both the primary tumor and the lymph nodes.

Evaluation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment Response After Locoregional Therapy.

Locoregional therapy (LRT) for hepatocellular carcinoma can be used alone or with other treatment modalities to reduce rates of progression, improve survival, or act as a bridge to cure. As the use of LRT expands, so too has the need for systems to evaluate treatment response, such as the World Health Organization and modified Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors systems and more recently, the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) treatment response algorithm (TRA). Early validation results for LI-RADS TRA have been promising, and as research accrues, the TRA is expected to evolve in the near future.

LI-RADS treatment response lexicon: review, refresh and resolve with emerging data.

The imaging findings after loco regional treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma are variable based on the type of treatment used, the timing interval of imaging after treatment, and the cross-sectional modality used for treatment response assessment. Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Treatment Response Algorithm (TRA) is a relatively new standardized method of evaluating treatment response after loco regional therapy to hepatocellular carcinoma. In this article, we provide an overview of the evolution of the treatment response algorithm, its current applicability and its outlook for the future. We will review current guidelines and discuss proposed changes to the algorithm as a means to continually improve LI-RADS TRA as an assessment tool post-loco regional treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Imaging of treatment response during systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Systemic therapy for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has rapidly evolved over the last 4 years; eight new drug regimens have gained Food and Drug Administration approval for treatment of advanced HCC since 2017. As several lines of therapy are now available for the treatment of HCC, accurate CT and MRI treatment response assessment is important for informing optimal management of affected patients. This article will review the systemic therapies currently approved for the treatment of HCC, focusing on items most pertinent to radiologists. Treatment response assessment of patients with HCC undergoing systemic therapy differs from treatment response assessment of patients receiving locoregional therapies, and principle differences will be highlighted. Finally, this review will provide a framework for the interpretation of CT and MRI examinations of patients with HCC being treated with systemic therapy and will explore the relevant scientific data currently available.

Clinical Importance of Incidental Homogeneous Renal Masses That Measure 10-40 mm and 21-39 HU at Portal Venous Phase CT: A 12-Institution Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND. Incidental homogeneous renal masses are frequently encountered at portal venous phase CT. The American College of Radiology Incidental Findings Committee's white paper on renal masses recommends additional imaging for incidental homogeneous renal masses greater than 20 HU, but single-center data and the Bosniak classification version 2019 suggest the optimal attenuation threshold for detecting solid masses should be higher. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to determine the clinical importance of small (10-40 mm) incidentally detected homogeneous renal masses measuring 21-39 HU at portal venous phase CT. METHODS. We performed a 12-institution retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent portal venous phase CT for a nonrenal indication. The date of the first CT at each institution ranged from January 1, 2008, to January 1, 2014. Consecutive reports from 12,167 portal venous phase CT examinations were evaluated. Images were reviewed for 4529 CT examinations whose report described a focal renal mass. Eligible masses were 10-40 mm, well-defined, subjectively homogeneous, and 21-39 HU. Of these, masses that were shown to be solid without macroscopic fat; classified as Bosniak IIF, III, or IV; or confirmed to be malignant were considered clinically important. The reference standard was renal mass protocol CT or MRI, ultrasound of definitively benign cysts or solid masses, single-phase contrast-enhanced CT or unenhanced MRI showing no growth or morphologic change for 5 years or more, or clinical follow-up 5 years or greater. A reference standard was available for 346 masses in 300 patients. The 95% CIs were calculated using the binomial exact method. RESULTS. Eligible masses were identified in 4.2% of patients (514/12,167; 95% CI, 3.9-4.6%). Of 346 masses with a reference standard, none were clinically important (0%; 95% CI, 0-0.9%). Mean mass size was 17 mm; 72% (248/346) measured 21-30 HU, and 28% (98/346) measured 31-39 HU. CONCLUSION. Incidental small homogeneous renal masses measuring 21-39 HU at portal venous phase CT are common and highly likely benign. CLINICAL IMPACT. The change in attenuation threshold signifying the need for additional imaging from greater than 20 HU to greater than 30 HU proposed by the Bosniak classification version 2019 is supported.

Effect of shelter-in-place on emergency department radiology volumes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to significant disruptions in the healthcare system including surges of infected patients exceeding local capacity, closures of primary care offices, and delays of non-emergent medical care. Government-initiated measures to decrease healthcare utilization (i.e., "flattening the curve") have included shelter-in-place mandates and social distancing, which have taken effect across most of the USA. We evaluate the immediate impact of the Public Health Messaging and shelter-in-place mandates on Emergency Department (ED) demand for radiology services. METHODS: We analyzed ED radiology volumes from the five University of California health systems during a 2-week time period following the shelter-in-place mandate and compared those volumes with March 2019 and early April 2019 volumes. RESULTS: ED radiology volumes declined from the 2019 baseline by 32 to 40% (p < 0.001) across the five health systems with a total decrease in volumes across all 5 systems by 35% (p < 0.001). Stratifying by subspecialty, the smallest declines were seen in non-trauma thoracic imaging, which decreased 18% (p value < 0.001), while all other non-trauma studies decreased by 48% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Total ED radiology demand may be a marker for public adherence to shelter-in-place mandates, though ED chest radiology demand may increase with an increase in COVID-19 cases.

Prognostic value of metabolic tumor burden from (18)F-FDG PET in surgical patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the prognostic value of metabolic tumor burden as measured with metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) on 2-deoxy-2-((18)F)fluoro-D-glucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT), independent of current Union Internacional Contra la Cancrum/American Joint Committee on Cancer tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM) stage; in comparison with that of standardized uptake value (SUV) in surgical patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed 104 consecutive surgical patients (47 males, 57 females, median age at PET/CT scan of 67.92 years) with diagnosed stage I to IV NSCLC who had baseline (18)F-FDG PET/CT scans. The (18)F-FDG PET/CT scans were performed in accordance with National Cancer Institute guidelines. The MTV of tumors in the whole body (MTV(WB)), TLG of tumors in the whole body (TLG(WB)), the maximum standardized uptake value of tumors in the whole body (SUV(maxWB)) as well as the mean standardized uptake value of tumor in the whole body (SUV(meanWB)) were measured. The median follow-up among 67 survivors was 42.07 months from the PET/CT (range 2.82-80.95 months). Statistical methods included Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox regression, and C-statistics. The interobserver variability of SUV(maxWB), SUV(meanWB), MTV(WB), and TLG(WB) between two observers was analyzed using concordance correlation coefficients (CCCs). RESULTS: The interobserver variability of SUV(maxWB), SUV(meanWB), MTV(WB) and TLG(WB) was very low with CCCs greater than 0.882. There was a statistically significant association of stage with overall survival (OS). The hazard ratio (HR) of stage III and stage IV as compared with stage I was 3.60 (P = .001) and 4.00 (P = .013), respectively. The MTV(WB) was significantly associated with OS with a HR for 1-unit increase of ln(MTV(WB)) of 1.40/1.32 (P = .004/.039), before/after adjusting for stage and other prognostic factors including chemoradiation therapy, and surgical procedure, respectively. TLG(WB) had a statistically significant association with OS before and after adjusting for stage and the other prognostic factors. The HR for 1-unit increase in ln(TLG(WB)) was 1.26 (P = .011) and 1.25 (P = .031), before and after the adjustment, respectively. Subjects with conditions that led to pneumonectomy (HR = 2.82, P = .035) or segmental resection (HR = 3.44, P = .044) had significantly worse survival than those needing lobectomy. There was no statistically significant association between OS and age, gender, tumor histology, ln(SUV(maxWB)), and ln(SUV(meanWB)) (all P > .05). There were 37 deaths during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Baseline whole-body metabolic tumor burden as measured with MTV(WB) and TLG(WB) on FDG PET is a prognostic measure independent of clinical stage and other prognostic factors including chemoradiation therapy and surgical procedure with low interobserver variability and may be used to further risk stratify surgical patients with NSCLC. This study also suggests that MTV and TLG are better prognostic measures than SUV(max) and SUV(mean). These results will need to be validated in larger cohorts in a prospective study.

Prognostic value of metabolic tumor burden on 18F-FDG PET in nonsurgical patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to assess the prognostic value of metabolic tumor burden on 2-deoxy-2-[(18)F]fluoro-D-glucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/CT measured with metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG), independent of Union Internationale Contra la Cancrum (UICC)/American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM) stage, in comparison with that of standardized uptake value (SUV) in nonsurgical patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed 169 consecutive nonsurgical patients (78 men, 91 women, median age of 68 years) with newly diagnosed NSCLC who had pretreatment (18)F-FDG PET/CT scans. The (18)F-FDG PET/CT scans were performed in accordance with National Cancer Institute guidelines. The MTV of whole-body tumor (MTV(WB)), of primary tumor (MTV(T)), of nodal metastases (MTV(N)), and of distant metastases (MTV(M)); the TLG of whole-body tumor (TLG(WB)), of primary tumor (TLG(T)), of nodal metastases (TLG(N)), and of distant metastases (TLG(M)); the SUV(max) of whole-body tumor (SUV(maxWB)), of primary tumor (SUV(maxT)), of nodal metastases (SUV(maxN)), and of distant metastases (SUV(maxM)) as well as the SUV(mean) of whole-body tumor (SUV(meanWB)), of primary tumor (SUV(meanT)), of nodal metastases (SUV(meanN)), and of distant metastases (SUV(meanM)) were measured with the PETedge tool on a MIMvista workstation with manual adjustment. The median follow-up among survivors was 35 months from the PET/CT (range 2-82 months). Statistical methods included Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox regression, and C-statistics. RESULTS: There were a total of 139 deaths during follow-up. Median overall survival (OS) was 10.9 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.0-13.2 months]. The MTV was statistically associated with OS. The hazard ratios (HR) for 1 unit increase of ln(MTV(WB)), √(MTV(T)), √(MTV(N)), and √(MTV(M)) before/after adjusting for stage were: 1.47/1.43 (p < 0.001/<0.001), 1.06/1.05 (p < 0.001/<0.001), 1.11/1.10 (p < 0.001/<0.001), and 1.04/1.03 (p = 0.007/0.043), respectively. TLG had statistically significant associations with OS with the HRs for 1 unit increase in ln(TLG(WB)), √(TLG(T)), √(TLG(N)), and √(TLG(M)) before/after adjusting for stage being 1.36/1.33 (p < 0.001/<0.001), 1.02/1.02 (p = 0.001/0.002), 1.05/1.04 (p < 0.001/<0.001), and 1.02/1.02 (p = 0.003/0.024), respectively. The ln(SUV(maxWB)) and √(SUV(maxN)) were statistically associated with OS with the corresponding HRs for a 1 unit increase before/after adjusting for stage being 1.46/1.43 (p = 0.013/0.024) and 1.22/1.16 (p = 0.002/0.040). The √(SUV(meanN)) was statistically associated with OS before and after adjusting for stage with HRs for a 1 unit increase of 1.32 (p < 0.001) and 1.24 (p = 0.015), respectively. The √(SUV(meanM)) and √(SUV(maxM)) were statistically associated with OS before adjusting for stage with HRs for a 1 unit increase of 1.26 (p = 0.017) and 1.18 (p = 0.007), respectively, but not after adjusting for stage (p = 0.127 and 0.056). There was no statistically significant association between OS and √(SUV(maxT)), ln(SUV(meanWB)), or √(SUV(meanT)). There was low interobserver variability among three radiologists with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) greater than 0.94 for SUV(maxWB), ln(MTV(WB)), and ln(TLG(WB)). Interobserver variability was higher for SUV(meanWB) with an ICC of 0.806. CONCLUSION: Baseline metabolic tumor burdens at the level of whole-body tumor, primary tumor, nodal metastasis, and distant metastasis as measured with MTV and TLG on FDG PET are prognostic measures independent of clinical stage with low inter-observer variability and may be used to further stratify nonsurgical patients with NSCLC. This study also suggests MTV and TLG are better prognostic measures than SUV(max) and SUV(mean). These results will need to be validated in larger cohorts in a prospective study.