An Illustrated Review of the Recent 2019 World Health Organization Classification of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Radiologic and Pathologic Correlation.

ABSTRACT: Recent advances in molecular pathology and an improved understanding of the etiology of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) have given rise to an updated World Health Organization classification. Since gastroenteropancreatic NENs (GEP-NENs) are the most common forms of NENs and their incidence has been increasing constantly, they will be the focus of our attention. Here, we review the findings at the foundation of the new classification system, discuss how it impacts imaging research and radiological practice, and illustrate typical and atypical imaging and pathological findings. Gastroenteropancreatic NENs have a highly variable clinical course, which existing classification schemes based on proliferation rate were unable to fully capture. While well- and poorly differentiated NENs both express neuroendocrine markers, they are fundamentally different diseases, which may show similar proliferation rates. Genetic alterations specific to well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors graded 1 to 3 and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine cancers of small cell and large-cell subtype have been identified. The new tumor classification places new demands and creates opportunities for radiologists to continue providing the clinically most relevant report and on researchers to design projects, which continue to be clinically applicable.

Light and shadow of watch-and-wait strategy in rectal cancer: oncological result, clinical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: The watch-and-wait (WW) strategy is a potential option for patients with rectal cancer who obtain a complete clinic response after neoadjuvant therapy. The aim of this study is to analyze the long-term oncological outcomes and perform a cost-effectiveness analysis in patients undergoing this strategy for rectal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data of patients treated with the WW strategy were prospectively collected from January 2015 to January 2020. A control group was created, matched 1:1 from a pool of 480 patients undergoing total mesorectal excision. An independent company carried out the financial analysis. Clinical and oncological outcomes were analyzed in both groups. Outcome parameters included surgical and follow-up costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost per QALY gained or the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: Forty patients were included in the WW group, with 40 patients in the surgical group. During a median follow-up period of 36 months, metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) were similar in the two groups. In the WW group, nine (22%) local regrowths were detected in the first 2 years. The permanent stoma rate was slightly higher after salvage surgery in the WW group compared to the surgical group (48.5% vs 20%, p < 0.01). The cost-effectiveness analysis was slightly better for the WW group, especially for low rectal cancer compared to medium-high rectal cancer (ICER = - 108,642.1 vs ICER = - 42,423). CONCLUSIONS: The WW strategy in locally advanced rectal cancer offers similar oncological outcomes with respect to the surgical group and excellent results in quality of life and cost outcomes, especially for low rectal cancer. Nonetheless, the complex surgical field during salvage surgery can lead to a high permanent stoma rate; therefore, the careful selection of patients is mandatory.

Improving staging of rectal cancer in the pelvis: the role of PET/MRI.

PURPOSE: The role of positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance (PET/MR) in evaluating the local extent of rectal cancer remains uncertain. This study aimed to investigate the possible role of PET/MR versus magnetic resonance (MR) in clinically staging rectal cancer. METHODS: This retrospective two-center cohort study of 62 patients with untreated rectal cancer investigated the possible role of baseline staging PET/MR versus stand-alone MR in determination of clinical stage. Two readers reviewed T and N stage, mesorectal fascia involvement, tumor length, distance from the anal verge, sphincter involvement, and extramural vascular invasion (EMVI). Sigmoidoscopy, digital rectal examination, and follow-up imaging, along with surgery when available, served as the reference standard. RESULTS: PET/MR outperformed MR in evaluating tumor size (42.5 ± 21.03 mm per the reference standard, 54 ± 20.45 mm by stand-alone MR, and 44 ± 20 mm by PET/MR, P = 0.004), and in identifying N status (correct by MR in 36/62 patients [58%] and by PET/MR in 49/62 cases [79%]; P = 0.02) and external sphincter infiltration (correct by MR in 6/10 and by PET/MR in 9/10; P = 0.003). No statistically significant differences were observed in relation to any other features. CONCLUSION: PET/MR provides a more precise assessment of the local extent of rectal cancers in evaluating cancer length, N status, and external sphincter involvement. PET/MR offers the opportunity to improve clinical decision-making, especially when evaluating low rectal tumors with possible external sphincter involvement.

An international expert opinion statement on the utility of PET/MR for imaging of skeletal metastases.

BACKGROUND: MR is an important imaging modality for evaluating musculoskeletal malignancies owing to its high soft tissue contrast and its ability to acquire multiparametric information. PET provides quantitative molecular and physiologic information and is a critical tool in the diagnosis and staging of several malignancies. PET/MR, which can take advantage of its constituent modalities, is uniquely suited for evaluating skeletal metastases. We reviewed the current evidence of PET/MR in assessing for skeletal metastases and provided recommendations for its use. METHODS: We searched for the peer reviewed literature related to the usage of PET/MR in the settings of osseous metastases. In addition, expert opinions, practices, and protocols of major research institutions performing research on PET/MR of skeletal metastases were considered. RESULTS: Peer-reviewed published literature was included. Nuclear medicine and radiology experts, including those from 13 major PET/MR centers, shared the gained expertise on PET/MR use for evaluating skeletal metastases and contributed to a consensus expert opinion statement. [18F]-FDG and non [18F]-FDG PET/MR may provide key advantages over PET/CT in the evaluation for osseous metastases in several primary malignancies. CONCLUSION: PET/MR should be considered for staging of malignancies where there is a high likelihood of osseous metastatic disease based on the characteristics of the primary malignancy, hight clinical suspicious and in case, where the presence of osseous metastases will have an impact on patient management. Appropriate choice of tumor-specific radiopharmaceuticals, as well as stringent adherence to PET and MR protocols, should be employed.

Hybrid imaging of the abdomen and pelvis.

Accurate imaging is crucial for lesion detection in abdominal organs, for the noninvasive characterization of focal and diffuse abnormalities, and for surgical planning. To accomplish these tasks, several imaging modalities such as multidetector computer tomography (MDCT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) are used for abdominal imaging, providing important morphological, functional or metabolic information. More recently, PET/MRI has been gaining attention due to the possibility of combining high-resolution imaging with metabolic imaging. PET/MRI is a novel hybrid imaging technology that in the near future might play a pivotal role in the clinical management of oncologic and inflammatory abdominopelvic diseases. Despite the still limited number of published clinical studies, PET/MRI has been proven to be at least equivalent to PET/CT and to standalone MRI in a variety of oncologic disease. Moreover, in selected and focused clinical studies, it has been proven to outperform current standard of care imaging, for example, in evaluating cholangiocarcinomas, liver metastases, untreated and treated rectal cancer. This has also had an impact on therapeuticmanagement in some studies. Therefore in some institutions, including those of the authors, PET/MRI is becoming the new standard imaging modality in staging treatment-naïve intrahepatic massforming cholangiocarcinomas and prior to complicated hepatic surgery.

[Hybrid imaging of the abdomen and pelvis. German version]. / Hybridbildgebung bei abdominellen Erkrankungen.

Accurate imaging is crucial for lesion detection in abdominal organs, for the noninvasive characterization of focal and diffuse abnormalities, and for surgical planning. To accomplish these tasks, several imaging modalities such as multidetector computer tomography (MDCT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) are used for abdominal imaging, providing important morphological, functional or metabolic information. More recently, PET/MRI has been gaining attention due to the possibility of combining high-resolution imaging with metabolic imaging. PET/MRI is a novel hybrid imaging technology that in the near future might play a pivotal role in the clinical management of oncologic and inflammatory abdominopelvic diseases. Despite the still limited number of published clinical studies, PET/MRI has been proven to be at least equivalent to PET/CT and to stand-alone MRI in a variety of oncologic disease. Moreover, in selected and focused clinical studies, it has been proven to outperform current standard of care imaging, for example, in evaluating cholangiocarcinomas, liver metastases, untreated and treated rectal cancer. This has also had an impact on therapeutic management in some studies. Therefore in some institutions, including those of the authors, PET/MRI is becoming the new standard imaging modality in staging treatment-naïve intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinomas and prior to complicated hepatic surgery.

Role of 18F-PET-CT to predict pathological response after neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) is universally considered to be a valid treatment to achieve downstaging, to improve local disease control and to obtain better resectability in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). The aim of this study is to correlate the change in the tumour 18F-FDG PET-CT standardized uptake value (SUV) before and after nCRT, in order to obtain an early prediction of the pathologic response (pR) achieved in patients with LARC. DATA DESCRIPTION: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with LARC diagnosis who underwent curative resection. All patients underwent a baseline 18F-FDG PET-CT scan within the week prior to the initiation of the treatment (PET-CT SUV1) and a second scan (PET-CT SUV2) within 6 weeks of the completion of nCRT. We evaluated the prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET-CT in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with LARC.A total of 133 patients with LARC were included in the study. Patients were divided in two groups according to the TRG (tumour regression grade): 107 (80%) as the responders group (TRG0-TRG1) and 26 (25%) as the no-responders group (TRG2-TRG3). We obtained a significant difference in Δ%SUV between the two different groups; responders versus no-responders (p < 0.012). The results of this analysis show that 18F-FDG PET-CT may be an indicator to evaluate the pR to nCRT in patients with LARC. The decrease in 18F-FDG PET-CT uptake in the primary tumour may offer important information in order for an early identification of those patients more likely to obtain a pCR to nCRT and to predict those who are unlikely to significantly regress.

Evaluation of the Diagnostic Performance of Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance for the Diagnosis of Liver Metastases.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance (MR) versus stand-alone PET and stand-alone magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the detection and characterization of suspected liver metastases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multi-institutional retrospective performance study was approved by the institutional review boards and was Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliant, with waiver of informed consent. Seventy-nine patients with confirmed solid extrahepatic malignancies who underwent upper abdominal PET/MR between February 2017 and June 2018 were included. Where focal hepatic lesions were identified, the likelihood of a diagnosis of a liver metastasis was defined on an ordinal scale for MRI, PET, and PET/MRI by 3 readers: 1 nuclear medicine physician and 2 radiologists. The number of lesions per patient, lesion size, and involved hepatic segments were recorded. Proof of metastases was based on histopathologic correlation or clinical/imaging follow-up. Diagnostic performance was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and receiver operator characteristic curve analysis. RESULTS: A total of 79 patients (53 years, interquartile range, 50-68; 43 men) were included. PET/MR had a sensitivity of 95%, specificity of 97%, positive predictive value of 97%, and negative predictive value of 95%. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of MRI were 88%, 98%, 98%, and 90% and for PET were 83%, 97%, 97%, and 86%, respectively. The areas under the curve for PET/MRI, MRI, and PET were 95%, 92%, and 92%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Contrast-enhanced PET/MR has a higher sensitivity and negative predictive value than either PET or MRI alone in the setting of suspected liver metastases. Fewer lesions were characterized as indeterminate by PET/MR in comparison with PET and MRI. This superior performance could potentially impact treatment and management decisions for patients with suspected liver metastases.