-
Something wrong with this record ?
What Is the Role of Imaging at Primary Diagnostic Work-Up in Uterine Cervical Cancer?
IS. Haldorsen, N. Lura, J. Blaakær, D. Fischerova, HMJ. Werner,
Language English Country United States
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Review
NLK
ProQuest Central
from 2013-01-01 to 1 year ago
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost)
from 1999-01-01 to 1 year ago
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
from 2013-01-01 to 1 year ago
- MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Lymphatic Metastasis MeSH
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging methods MeSH
- Uterine Cervical Neoplasms diagnostic imaging pathology therapy MeSH
- Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography methods MeSH
- Tomography, X-Ray Computed methods MeSH
- Neoplasm Staging MeSH
- Ultrasonography methods MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Review MeSH
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: For uterine cervical cancer, the recently revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system (2018) incorporates imaging and pathology assessments in its staging. In this review we summarize the reported staging performances of conventional and novel imaging methods and provide an overview of promising novel imaging methods relevant for cervical cancer patient care. RECENT FINDINGS: Diagnostic imaging during the primary diagnostic work-up is recommended to better assess tumor extent and metastatic disease and is now reflected in the 2018 FIGO stages 3C1 and 3C2 (positive pelvic and/or paraaortic lymph nodes). For pretreatment local staging, imaging by transvaginal or transrectal ultrasound (TVS, TRS) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is instrumental to define pelvic tumor extent, including a more accurate assessment of tumor size, stromal invasion depth, and parametrial invasion. In locally advanced cervical cancer, positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) or computed tomography (CT) is recommended, since the identification of metastatic lymph nodes and distant metastases has therapeutic consequences. Furthermore, novel imaging techniques offer visualization of microstructural and functional tumor characteristics, reportedly linked to clinical phenotype, thus with a potential for further improving risk stratification and individualization of treatment. Diagnostic imaging by MRI/TVS/TRS and PET-CT/CT is instrumental for pretreatment staging in uterine cervical cancer and guides optimal treatment strategy. Novel imaging techniques may also provide functional biomarkers with potential relevance for developing more targeted treatment strategies in cervical cancer.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc20025762
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20201222155413.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 201125s2019 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1007/s11912-019-0824-0 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)31359169
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Haldorsen, Ingfrid S $u Mohn Medical Imaging and Visualization Centre, Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Jonas Liesvei 65, Postbox 7800, 5021, Bergen, Norway. ingfrid.haldorsen@helse-bergen.no. Section for Radiology, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, 5020, Bergen, Norway. ingfrid.haldorsen@helse-bergen.no.
- 245 10
- $a What Is the Role of Imaging at Primary Diagnostic Work-Up in Uterine Cervical Cancer? / $c IS. Haldorsen, N. Lura, J. Blaakær, D. Fischerova, HMJ. Werner,
- 520 9_
- $a PURPOSE OF REVIEW: For uterine cervical cancer, the recently revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system (2018) incorporates imaging and pathology assessments in its staging. In this review we summarize the reported staging performances of conventional and novel imaging methods and provide an overview of promising novel imaging methods relevant for cervical cancer patient care. RECENT FINDINGS: Diagnostic imaging during the primary diagnostic work-up is recommended to better assess tumor extent and metastatic disease and is now reflected in the 2018 FIGO stages 3C1 and 3C2 (positive pelvic and/or paraaortic lymph nodes). For pretreatment local staging, imaging by transvaginal or transrectal ultrasound (TVS, TRS) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is instrumental to define pelvic tumor extent, including a more accurate assessment of tumor size, stromal invasion depth, and parametrial invasion. In locally advanced cervical cancer, positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) or computed tomography (CT) is recommended, since the identification of metastatic lymph nodes and distant metastases has therapeutic consequences. Furthermore, novel imaging techniques offer visualization of microstructural and functional tumor characteristics, reportedly linked to clinical phenotype, thus with a potential for further improving risk stratification and individualization of treatment. Diagnostic imaging by MRI/TVS/TRS and PET-CT/CT is instrumental for pretreatment staging in uterine cervical cancer and guides optimal treatment strategy. Novel imaging techniques may also provide functional biomarkers with potential relevance for developing more targeted treatment strategies in cervical cancer.
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a lymfatické metastázy $7 D008207
- 650 _2
- $a magnetická rezonanční tomografie $x metody $7 D008279
- 650 _2
- $a staging nádorů $7 D009367
- 650 _2
- $a PET/CT $x metody $7 D000072078
- 650 _2
- $a počítačová rentgenová tomografie $x metody $7 D014057
- 650 _2
- $a ultrasonografie $x metody $7 D014463
- 650 _2
- $a nádory děložního čípku $x diagnostické zobrazování $x patologie $x terapie $7 D002583
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 655 _2
- $a přehledy $7 D016454
- 700 1_
- $a Lura, Njål $u Mohn Medical Imaging and Visualization Centre, Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Jonas Liesvei 65, Postbox 7800, 5021, Bergen, Norway.
- 700 1_
- $a Blaakær, Jan $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
- 700 1_
- $a Fischerova, Daniela $u Gynecological Oncology Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, General University Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Werner, Henrica M J $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, 5020, Bergen, Norway.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00188750 $t Current oncology reports $x 1534-6269 $g Roč. 21, č. 9 (2019), s. 77
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31359169 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20201125 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20201222155409 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1599907 $s 1116448
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2019 $b 21 $c 9 $d 77 $e 20190729 $i 1534-6269 $m Current oncology reports $n Curr Oncol Rep $x MED00188750
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20201125