The implications of missed or misinterpreted cases of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma on imaging: a multi-centered population-based study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the proportion of missed/misinterpreted imaging examinations of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and their association with the diagnostic interval and survival. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-seven patients (mean age, 71.8 years) diagnosed with PDAC in 2014-2015 were identified from the Nova Scotia Cancer Registry. Demographics, stage, tumor location, and dates of initial presentation, diagnosis, and, if applicable, surgery and death were recorded. US, CT, and MRI examinations during the diagnostic interval were independently graded by two radiologists using the RADPEER system; discordance was resolved in consensus. Mean diagnostic interval and survival were compared amongst RADPEER groups (one-way ANOVA). Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed for age (< 65, 65-79, ≥ 80), sex, tumor location (proximal/distal), stage (I-IV), surgery (yes/no), chemotherapy (yes/no), and RADPEER score (1-3). Association between these covariates and survival was assessed (multivariate Cox proportion hazards model). RESULTS: RADPEER 1-3 scores were assigned to 191, 27, and 39 patients, respectively. Mean diagnostic intervals were 53, 86, and 192 days, respectively (p = 0.018). There were only 3/257 (1.2%) survivors. Mean survival was not different between groups (p = 0.43). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed worse survival in RADPEER 1-2 (p = 0.007), older age (p < 0.001), distal PDAC (p = 0.016), stage (p < 0.0001), and no surgery (p < 0.001); survival was not different with sex (p = 0.083). Cox analysis showed better survival in RADPEER 3 (p = 0.005), women (p = 0.002), surgical patients (p < 0.001), and chemotherapy (p < 0.001), and worse survival in stage IV (p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Imaging-related delays occurred in one-fourth of patients and were associated with longer diagnostic intervals but not worse survival, potentially due to overall poor survival in the cohort. KEY POINTS: • One-fourth of patients (66/257, 25.7%) with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) underwent imaging examinations that demonstrated manifestations of the disease, but findings were either missed or misinterpreted; RADPEER 2 and 3 scores were assigned to 10.5% and 15.2% of patients, respectively. • Patients with imaging examinations assigned RADPEER 3 scores were associated with significantly longer diagnostic intervals (192 ± 323 days) than RADPEER 1 (53 ± 86 days) and RADPEER 2 (86 ± 120 days) (p < 0.001). • Imaging-related diagnostic delays were not associated with worse survival; however, this may have been confounded by the overall poor survival in our cohort (only 3/257 (1.2%) survivors).

Identification of tumor size as the only factor associated with nondiagnostic biopsies in patients with small renal masses.

INTRODUCTION: As greater numbers of small renal masses (SRMs) are discovered incidentally, renal tumor biopsy (RTB) is an increasingly recognized step for the management of these lesions, ideally for the prevention of surgical overtreatment for benign disease. While the diagnosis can often be obtained preoperatively by RTB, indeterminate results create greater difficulty for patients and clinicians. This study examines a series of RTBs, identifying the portion of these that were able to yield a diagnosis, and correlates patient factors, including RENAL and PADUA scoring, with the outcome of a non-diagnostic result. METHODS: Patients were identified as having undergone RTB at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Ontario, Canada, between January 2000 and December 2009. Data was compiled from these 423 patients and analyzed using CART methodology to determine the level of association between various patient and tumor factors and the outcome of a non-diagnostic biopsy. Tumor size was further used to develop a classification tree to describe the prediction of a non-diagnostic biopsy. RESULTS: Of these 423 patients undergoing RTB, 66 (16%) resulted in a non-diagnostic biopsy. The only patient or tumor factor that was found to be associated with a non-diagnostic outcome was mass size, where small masses (<1.28 cm diameter) were found to have a 38% chance of being non-diagnostic, compared with a 13% chance in those tumors >1.28 cm diameter (86% accuracy, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: When evaluating SRMs for diagnostic workup, mass size is the only tumor or patient characteristic associated with a non-diagnostic RTB.

National survey to identify subspecialties at risk for physician shortages in Canadian academic radiology departments.

PURPOSE: To identify subspecialty fields in Canadian academic radiology departments that are at risk for future manpower shortages. To determine reasons for the potential shortages and suggest potential solutions. METHODS: An anonymous online survey was sent by e-mail to radiology residents and academic radiology department heads in Canada. The survey was open from April 1 to August 1, 2006. Statistical analysis by using the SAS Frequency Procedure was performed on the results. RESULTS: Interventional radiology, neuroradiology, mammography, cardiac imaging, and pediatric radiology were identified as areas in which there will be increasing workforce demands. Mammography, pediatric radiology, and cardiac imaging were identified as areas in which there will be a potential decrease in supply. Of the residents, 65.83% intended on pursuing subspecialty training. Priorities were interesting work, job availability, and work schedule. Nuclear medicine, mammography, pediatric radiology, and interventional radiology were identified as the top 4 areas in which residents specifically did not want to pursue further subspecialty training. Only 15% of resident respondents received career counseling during residency, and only 50% of those residents thought it was adequate. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey results indicate that mammography, cardiac imaging, and pediatric radiology are at risk for manpower shortages, and interventional radiology may be at risk. Increased efforts to recruit trainees may be necessary to ensure that these subspecialties maintain their presence in the future. Only 15% of the surveyed residents received career counseling during residency. This is a relatively untapped forum that academic staff could use to help recruit new trainees into these underserved subspecialties.