RESUMEN
(1) Background: External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and concurrent chemotherapy, followed by brachytherapy (BT), offer a standard of care for patients with locally advanced cervical carcinoma. Conventionally, large safety margins are required to compensate for organ movement, potentially increasing toxicity. Lately, daily high-quality cone beam CT (CBCT)-guided adaptive radiotherapy, aided by artificial intelligence (AI), became clinically available. Thus, online treatment plans can be adapted to the current position of the tumor and the adjacent organs at risk (OAR), while the patient is lying on the treatment couch. We sought to evaluate the potential of this new technology, including a weekly shuttle-based 3T-MRI scan in various treatment positions for tumor evaluation and for decreasing treatment-related side effects. (2) Methods: This is a prospective one-armed phase-II trial consisting of 40 patients with cervical carcinoma (FIGO IB-IIIC1) with an age ≥ 18 years and a Karnofsky performance score ≥ 70%. EBRT (45-50.4 Gy in 25-28 fractions with 55.0-58.8 Gy simultaneous integrated boosts to lymph node metastases) will be accompanied by weekly shuttle-based MRIs. Concurrent platinum-based chemotherapy will be given, followed by 28 Gy of BT (four fractions). The primary endpoint will be the occurrence of overall early bowel and bladder toxicity CTCAE grade 2 or higher (CTCAE v5.0). Secondary outcomes include clinical feasibility, quality of life, and imaging-based response assessment.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: According to PI-RADS v2.1, T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) is the dominant sequence for transition zone (TZ) lesions. This study aimed to assess, whether diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) information influences the assignment of T2WI scores. METHOD: Out of 283 prostate MRI examinations with correlated biopsy results, fourty-four patients were selected retrospectively: first, 22 patients with a TZ lesion with T2WI and DWI scores ≥ 4, to represent lesions with unequivocal suspicion on T2WI and DWI. Second, 22 additional patients with TZ lesions of similar T2WI appearance but with corresponding DWI score ≤ 3 were added as control. Four residents and one board-certified radiologist each performed two assessments of the included patients: First, only T2WI was available (T2-only read); second, both T2WI and DWI sequences were available (biparametric read). Lesion scores were assessed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test, inter-reader agreement using weighted kappa and Kendall's W statistics, and sensitivity/specificity using McNemar test. RESULTS: The T2WI scores were significantly different between the T2-only and biparametric read for 3 out of 4 residents (p ≤ 0.049) but not for the radiologist. The overall PI-RADS scores derived from the two reading sessions differed considerably for 35/220 cases (all readers pooled). Inter-reader agreement was fair for the T2WI and overall PI-RADS scores (mean kappa 0.27-0.30) and moderate for the DWI scores (mean kappa 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: For inexperienced readers, assessment of T2WI is variable and potentially biased by availability of DWI information, which can lead to changes of overall PI-RADS score and consequently clinical management. Assessment of T2WI should be performed before reviewing DWI to ensure non-biased interpretation of TZ lesions in the dominant sequence.
