Comparison between pelvic MRI, CT, and PET/CT in baseline staging and radiation planning of anal squamous cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To investigate the differences in baseline staging of anal squamous cell carcinoma based on CT, MRI, and PET/CT, and the resultant impact on the radiation plan. METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma who underwent baseline pelvic MRI, CT, and PET/CT (all examinations within 3 weeks of each other) from January 2010 to April 2020. CTs, MRIs, and PET/CTs were re-interpreted by three separate radiologists. Several imaging features were assessed; tumor stage was determined based on the eight edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual; and T (tumor), N (node), and M (metastasis) categories were determined based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. Radiologist assessments were then randomly presented to a radiation oncologist who formulated the radiation plan in a blinded fashion. RESULTS: Across 28 patients (median age, 62 years [range, 31-78], T-category classification was significantly different on PET/CT compared to MRI and CT (p = 0.037 and 0.031, respectively). PET/CT staged a higher proportion of patients with T1/T2 disease (16/28, 57%) compared to MRI (11/28, 39%) and CT (10/28, 36%). MRI staged a higher proportion of patients with T3/T4 disease (14/28, 50%) compared to CT (12/28, 43%) and PET/CT (11/28, 39%). However, there was no significant difference between the three imaging modalities in terms of either N-category, AJCC staging, or NCCN TNM group classification, or in treatment planning. CONCLUSION: Our exploratory study showed that MRI demonstrated a higher proportion of T3/T4 tumors, while PET/CT demonstrated more T1/T2 tumors; however, MRI, CT, and PET/CT did not show any significant differences in AJCC and TNM group categories, nor was there any significant difference in treatment doses between them when assessed independently by an experienced radiation oncologist.

Imaging of Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Survey Results and Expert Opinion from the Rectal and Anal Cancer Disease-Focused Panel of the Society of Abdominal Radiology.

The role and method of image-based staging of anal cancer has evolved with the rapid development of newer imaging modalities and the need to address the rising incidence of this rare cancer. In 2014, the European Society of Medical Oncology mandated pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for anal cancer and subsequently other societies such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network followed suit with similar recommendations. Nevertheless, great variability exists from center to center and even within individual centers. Notably, this is in stark contrast to the imaging of the anatomically nearby rectal cancer. As participating team members for this malignancy, we embarked on a comprehensive literature review of anal cancer imaging to understand the relative merits of these new technologies which developed after computed tomography (CT), e.g., MRI and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT). The results of this literature review helped to inform our next stage: questionnaire development regarding the imaging of anal cancer. Next, we distributed the questionnaire to members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) Rectal and Anal Disease-Focused Panel, a group of abdominal radiologists with special interest, experience, and expertise in rectal and anal cancer, to provide expert radiologist opinion on the appropriate anal cancer imaging strategy. In our expert opinion survey, experts advocated the use of MRI in general (65% overall and 91-100% for primary staging clinical scenarios) and acknowledged the superiority of PET/CT for nodal assessment (52-56% agreement for using PET/CT in primary staging clinical scenarios compared to 30% for using MRI). We therefore support the use of MRI and PET and suggest further exploration of PET/MRI as an optimal combined evaluation. Our questionnaire responses emphasized the heterogeneity in imaging practice as performed at numerous academic cancer centers across the United States and underscore the need for further reconciliation and establishment of best imaging practice guidelines for optimized patient care in anal cancer.

Addressing the quality of communication with older cancer patients with cognitive deficits: Development of a communication skills training module.

OBJECTIVE: Effective communication is an essential part of patient-centered care. The complexity of cancer care in older adults makes communication challenging, particularly when older patients have cognitive deficits and lose their autonomy. This paper describes the development, implementation, and evaluation of a communication skills training module for health care providers (HCPs) who work with older adults with cancer, with or at risk of developing cognitive deficits. METHOD: Using a pre-post single arm study design, 99 HCPs from a comprehensive cancer center in North-East USA, who worked primarily with geriatric patients, participated in the study. Participants included Advance Practice Providers (including Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants; n = 24, 24.2%); nurses (n = 23, 23.2%), social workers (n = 14, 14.1%), physicians (n = 13, 13.1%), and "other" HCPs (including occupational therapists, physical therapists, and psychologists; n = 20, 20.2%). The HCPs participated in a one-day geriatric communication skills training program in groups of 12-15 over a 2-year period. Participants complete pre-post surveys on module evaluation and perception of self-efficacy as well as pre-post video-recorded Standardized Patient Assessment (SPA) to evaluate communication skill uptake. RESULTS: Most participants evaluated the module positively; over 90% indicated that they agreed or strongly agreed with five of the six module evaluation items. HCPs' self-efficacy in communicating with cancer patients with cognitive deficits significantly increased from pre- to post-module training. There was a significant increase in the following communication skill use from pre- to post-training: checking patient preferences, declaring agenda, and inviting agenda. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Results demonstrated a successful implementation of the program as evidenced through favorable program evaluation, significant gains in self-efficacy, as well as significant improvement in several communication skills.