Prognostic MRI features to predict postresection survivals for very early to intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: Contrast-enhanced MRI can provide individualized prognostic information for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to investigate the value of MRI features to predict early (≤ 2 years)/late (> 2 years) recurrence-free survival (E-RFS and L-RFS, respectively) and overall survival (OS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive adult patients at a tertiary academic center who received curative-intent liver resection for very early to intermediate stage HCC and underwent preoperative contrast-enhanced MRI were retrospectively enrolled from March 2011 to April 2021. Three masked radiologists independently assessed 54 MRI features. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression analyses were conducted to investigate the associations of imaging features with E-RFS, L-RFS, and OS. RESULTS: This study included 600 patients (median age, 53 years; 526 men). During a median follow-up of 55.3 months, 51% of patients experienced recurrence (early recurrence: 66%; late recurrence: 34%), and 17% died. Tumor size, multiple tumors, rim arterial phase hyperenhancement, iron sparing in solid mass, tumor growth pattern, and gastroesophageal varices were associated with E-RFS and OS (largest p = .02). Nonperipheral washout (p = .006), markedly low apparent diffusion coefficient value (p = .02), intratumoral arteries (p = .01), and width of the main portal vein (p = .03) were associated with E-RFS but not with L-RFS or OS, while the VICT2 trait was specifically associated with OS (p = .02). Multiple tumors (p = .048) and radiologically-evident cirrhosis (p < .001) were the only predictors for L-RFS. CONCLUSION: Twelve visually-assessed MRI features predicted postoperative E-RFS (≤ 2 years), L-RFS (> 2 years), and OS for very early to intermediate-stage HCCs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The prognostic MRI features may help inform personalized surgical planning, neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapies, and postoperative surveillance, thus may be included in future prognostic models. KEY POINTS: • Tumor size, multiple tumors, rim arterial phase hyperenhancement, iron sparing, tumor growth pattern, and gastroesophageal varices predicted both recurrence-free survival within 2 years and overall survival. • Nonperipheral washout, markedly low apparent diffusion coefficient value, intratumoral arteries, and width of the main portal vein specifically predicted recurrence-free survival within 2 years, while the VICT2 trait specifically predicted overall survival. • Multiple tumors and radiologically-evident cirrhosis were the only predictors for recurrence-free survival beyond 2 years.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Colorectal Cancer Screening.

This review summarizes the relevant literature regarding colorectal screening with imaging. For individuals at average or moderate risk for colorectal cancer, CT colonography is usually appropriate for colorectal cancer screening. After positive results on a fecal occult blood test or immunohistochemical test, CT colonography is usually appropriate for colorectal cancer detection. For individuals at high risk for colorectal cancer (eg, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer, ulcerative colitis, or Crohn colitis), optical colonoscopy is preferred because of its ability to obtain biopsies to detect dysplasia. After incomplete colonoscopy, CT colonography is usually appropriate for colorectal cancer screening for individuals at average, moderate, or high risk. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Utility of a multidisciplinary tumor board in the management of pancreatic and upper gastrointestinal diseases: an observational study.

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: Multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTBs) are frequently employed in cancer centers but their value has been debated. We reviewed the decision-making process and resource utilization of our MDTB to assess its utility in the management of pancreatic and upper gastrointestinal tract conditions. METHODS: A prospectively-collected database was reviewed over a 12-month period. The primary outcome was change in management plan as a result of case discussion. Secondary outcomes included resources required to hold MDTB, survival, and adherence to treatment guidelines. RESULTS: Four hundred seventy cases were reviewed. MDTB resulted in a change in the proposed plan of management in 101 of 402 evaluable cases (25.1%). New plans favored obtaining additional diagnostic workup. No recorded variables were associated with a change in plan. For newly-diagnosed cases of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (n = 33), survival time was not impacted by MDTB (p = .154) and adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines was 100%. The estimated cost of physician time per case reviewed was $190. CONCLUSIONS: Our MDTB influences treatment decisions in a sizeable number of cases with excellent adherence to national guidelines. However, this requires significant time expenditure and may not impact outcomes. Regular assessments of the effectiveness of MDTBs should be undertaken.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria colorectal cancer screening.

Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. Most colorectal cancers can be prevented by detecting and removing the precursor adenomatous polyp. Individual risk factors for the development of colorectal cancer will influence the particular choice of screening tool. CT colonography (CTC) is the primary imaging test for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk individuals, whereas the double-contrast barium enema (DCBE) is now considered to be a test that may be appropriate, particularly in settings where CTC is unavailable. Single-contrast barium enema has a lower performance profile and is indicated for screening only when CTC and DCBE are not available. CTC is also the preferred test for colon evaluation following an incomplete colonoscopy. Imaging tests including CTC and DCBE are not indicated for colorectal cancer screening in high-risk patients with polyposis syndromes or inflammatory bowel disease. This paper presents the updated colorectal cancer imaging test ratings and is the result of evidence-based consensus by the ACR Appropriateness Criteria Expert Panel on Gastrointestinal Imaging. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.