Impact of pelvic MRI in routine clinical practice on staging of IB1–IIA2 cervical cancer

References

• Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:87–108. doi:10.3322/caac.2126225651787
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen W, Zheng R, Zeng H, Zhang S. The updated incidences and mortalities of major cancers in China, 2011. Chin J Cancer. 2015;34:502–507. doi:10.1186/s40880-015-0042-626370301
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Benedet JL, Pecorelli S. Why cancer staging? Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2006;95(Supplement 1):S3. doi:10.1016/S0020-7292(06)60026-X
   Google Scholar
• Bermudez A, Bhatla N, Leung E. Cancer of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015;131(Suppl 2):S88–95. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.06.00426433680
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ozsarlak O, Tjalma W, Schepens E, et al. The correlation of preoperative CT, MR imaging, and clinical staging (FIGO) with histopathology findings in primary cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:2338–2345. doi:10.1007/s00330-003-1928-212802611
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang Z, Xu W, Ma Y, Liu K, Li Y, Wang D. (18)F-FDG PET/CT can correct the clinical stages and predict pathological parameters before operation in cervical cancer. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85:877–884. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.02.01027130046
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhatla N, Aoki D, Sharma DN, Sankaranarayanan R. Cancer of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143(Suppl 2):22–36. doi:10.1002/ijgo.1261130306584
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourgioti C, Chatoupis K, Rodolakis A, et al. Incremental prognostic value of MRI in the staging of early cervical cancer: a prospective study and review of the literature. Clin Imaging. 2016;40:72–78. doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2015.09.01226459788
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meva J, Chaudhary RK, Bhaduri D, Bhatia M, Hatti S, Ba R. Lacunae in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification for cervical carcinoma observational study using TNM classification as comparator. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013;23:1071–1077. doi:10.1097/IGC.0b013e31829783c423792602
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hricak H, Gatsonis C, Chi DS, et al. Role of imaging in pretreatment evaluation of early invasive cervical cancer: results of the intergroup study American College of Radiology imaging network 6651-gynecologic oncology group 183. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:9329–9337. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.02.035416361632
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dhoot NM, Kumar V, Shinagare A, Kataki AC, Barmon D, Bhuyan U. Evaluation of carcinoma cervix using magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with clinical FIGO staging and impact on management. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2012;56:58–65. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9485.2011.02333.x22339747
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hancke K, Heilmann V, Straka P, Kreienberg R, Kurzeder C. Pretreatment staging of cervical cancer: is imaging better than palpation?: role of CT and MRI in preoperative staging of cervical cancer: single institution results for 255 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:2856–2861. doi:10.1245/s10434-008-0088-718696156
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fridsten S, Hellstrom AC, Hellman K, Sundin A, Soderen B, Blomqvist L. Preoperative MR staging of cervical carcinoma: are oblique and contrast-enhanced sequences necessary? Acta radiol open. 2016;5:2058460116679460. doi:10.1177/205846011667946027900204
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kong TW, Kim J, Son JH, et al. Preoperative nomogram for prediction of microscopic parametrial infiltration in patients with FIGO stage IB cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;142:109–114. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.05.01027179979
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linden A. Measuring diagnostic and predictive accuracy in disease management: an introduction to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. J Eval Clin Pract. 2006;12:132–139. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2005.00598.x16579821
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kraljevic Z, Viskovic K, Ledinsky M, et al. Primary uterine cervical cancer: correlation of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and clinical staging (FIGO) with histopathology findings. Coll Antropol. 2013;37:561–568. 23941005
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Van Nagell JR Jr. , Roddick JW Jr. , Lowin DM. The staging of cervical cancer: inevitable discrepancies between clinical staging and pathologic findinges. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1971;110:973–978. 5558978
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Averette HE, Ford JH Jr. , Dudan RC, Girtanner RE, Hoskins WJ, Lutz MH. Staging of cervical cancer. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1975;18:215–232. 1157361
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kim SH, Lee HJ, Kim YW. Correlation between tumor size and surveillance of lymph node metastasis for IB and IIA cervical cancer by magnetic resonance images. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:1945–1950. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.04.05321605954
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hricak H, Lacey CG, Sandles LG, Chang YC, Winkler ML, Stern JL. Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings. Radiology. 1988;166:623–631. doi:10.1148/radiology.166.3.33407563340756
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Coakley F, et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: tumor delineation by magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and clinical examination, verified by pathologic results, in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 intergroup study. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:5687–5694. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.07.479917179104
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein E, Testa A, Gaurilcikas A, et al. Early-stage cervical cancer: tumor delineation by magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound - A European multicenter trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;128:449–453. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.09.02523022593
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greco A, Mason P, Leung AWL, Dische S, McIndoe GAJ, Anderson MC. Staging of carcinoma of the uterine cervix: MRI-surgical correlation. Clin Radiol. 1989;40:401–405. 2758751
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sala E, Rockall AG, Freeman SJ, Mitchell DG, Reinhold C. The added role of MR imaging in treatment stratification of patients with gynecologic malignancies: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiology. 2013;266:717–740. doi:10.1148/radiol.1212031523431227
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi SH, Kim SH, Choi HJ, Park BK, Lee HJ. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: results of prospective study. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2004;28:620–627. 15480035
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheu MH, Chang CY, Wang JH, Yen MS. Preoperative staging of cervical carcinoma with MR imaging: a reappraisal of diagnostic accuracy and pitfalls. Eur Radiol. 2001;11:1828–1833. doi:10.1007/s00330000077411511909
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shweel MA, Abdel-Gawad EA, Abdel-Gawad EA, Abdelghany HS, Abdel-Rahman AM, Ibrahim EM. Uterine cervical malignancy: diagnostic accuracy of MRI with histopathologic correlation. J Clin Imaging Sci. 2012;2:42. doi:10.4103/2156-7514.9917522919556
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Qin Y, Peng Z, Lou J, Liu H, Deng F, Zheng Y. Discrepancies between clinical staging and pathological findings of operable cervical carcinoma with stage IB-IIB: a retrospective analysis of 818 patients. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009;49:542–544. doi:10.1111/j.1479-828X.2009.01065.x19780741
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balleyguier C, Sala E, Cunha TD, et al. Staging of uterine cervical cancer with MRI: guidelines of the European society of urogenital radiology. Eur Radiol. 2011;21:1102–1110. doi:10.1007/s00330-010-1998-x21063710
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Comprehensive Cancer Network. (NCCN) clinical practice guidelines in oncology. cervical cancer, version 1. ;2017 Available from: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp. Accessed October 12, 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Kim M, Suh DH, Kim K, Lee HJ, Kim YB, No JH. Magnetic resonance imaging as a valuable tool for predicting parametrial invasion in stage IB1 to IIA2 cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2017;27:332–338. doi:10.1097/IGC.0000000000000878
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang K, Park W, Huh SJ, et al. Parametrial involvement on magnetic resonance imaging has no effect on the survival of early-stage cervical cancer patients. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2017;27:507–513. doi:10.1097/IGC.000000000000090928129242
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woo S, Suh CH, Kim SY, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for detection of parametrial invasion in cervical cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature between 2012 and 2016. Eur Radiol. 2018;28(2):530–541. doi:10.1007/s00330-017-4958-x28726120
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park JJ, Kim CK, Park SY, Park BK. Parametrial invasion in cervical cancer: fused T2-weighted imaging and high-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging with background body signal suppression at 3 T. Radiology. 2015;274:734–741. doi:10.1148/radiol.1414092025299787
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar