Imaging in oncology from The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center: Diagnosis, staging, and surveillance of cervical carcinoma

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 180, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 1621-1632

  Kaur, Harmeet ^a   Silverman, Paul M ^a   Iyer, Revathy B ^a   Verschraegen, Claire F ^a   Eifel, Patricia J ^a   Charnsangavej, Chusilp ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MONITORING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECURRENT DISEASE; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; CARCINOMA; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; MIDDLE AGED; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR;

ADULT; AGED; CARCINOMA; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; RISK FACTORS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 0038173397     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/ajr.180.6.1801621     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. American Cancer Society. Uterine cervix. In: Cancer facts and figures 2002. New York: American Cancer Society, 2002:5
2. Pettersson F. Secondary prevention screening for carcinoma of the cervix. In: Kavanaugh JJ. ed. Cancer in women. Malden, MA: Blackwell Science, 1998:242-243
3. Rylander E. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. In: Kavanaugh JJ, ed. Cancer in women. Malden, MA: Blackwell Science, 1998:251-258
4. Creasman WT. New gynecologic cancer staging. Gynecol Oncol 1995;58:157-158
5. Van Nagell JR Jr, Roddick JW Jr, Lowin DM. The staging of cervical cancer: inevitable discrepancies between clinical and pathological findings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1971;110:973-978
6. Kupets R, Covens A. Is the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for cervical carcinoma able to predict survival in patients with cervical carcinoma? an assessment of clinimetric properties. Cancer 2001;92:796-804
7. Piver MS, Chung WS. Prognostic significance of cervical lesion size and pelvic nodal metastases in cervical carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 1975;46:507-510
8. Fuller AF Jr, Elliott N, Kosloff C, Hoskins WJ, Lewis JL Jr. Determinants of increased risk for recurrence in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for stage IB and IIA carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol 1989;33:34-39
9. Hricak H. Widespread use of MRI in gynecology: a myth or reality? Abdom Imaging 1997;22:579-588
10. Postema S, Peters LA, Hermans J, Trimbos JB, Pattynama PM. Cervical carcinoma: do fast SE and fat suppression techniques improve MR tumor staging at 0.5 T? J Comput Assist Tomogr 1996;20:807-811
11. Hawnaur JM, Johnson RJ, Buckley CH, Tindall V, Isherwood I. Staging, volume estimation, and assessment of nodal status in carcinoma of the cervix: comparison of magnetic imaging with surgical findings. Clin Radiol 1994;49:443-452
12. Sironi S, De Cobelli F, Scarfone G, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix: value of plain and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging in assessing degree of invasiveness. Radiology 1993;188:797-801
13. Hricak H, Hamm B, Semelka RC, et al. Carcinoma of the uterus: use of gadopentate dimeglumine in MR imaging. Radiology 1991;181:95-106
14. Yamashita Y, Takahashi M, Sawada T, Miyazaki K, Okamura H. Carcinoma of the cervix: dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 1992;182:643-648
15. Seki H, Azumi R, Kimura M, Sakai K. Stromal invasion by carcinoma of the cervix: assessment with dynamic MR imaging. AJR 1997;168:1579-1585
16. Hricak H, Lacey CG, Sandles LG, Chang YC, Winkler ML, Stern JL. Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings. Radiology 1998;166:623-631
17. Subak LL, Hricak H, Powell CB, Azizi L, Stern JL. Cervical carcinoma: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstet Gynecol 1995;86:43-50
18. Kim SH, Choi BI, Lee HP, et al. Uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of CT and MR findings. Radiology 1990;175:45-51
19. Sheu M, Chang C, Wang J, Yen M. MR staging of clinical stage I and Ila cervical carcinoma: a reappraisal of efficacy and pitfalls. Eur J Radiol 2001; 38:225-231
20. Hawighorst H, Knapstein PG, Weikel W, et al. Cervical carcinoma: comparison of standard and pharmokinetic MR imaging. Radiology 1996; 201:531-539
21. Togashi K, Morikawa K, Kataoka LM, Konishi J. Cervical cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 8:391-397
22. Hricak H, Yu KK. Radiology in invasive cervical cancer. AJR 1996;167:1101-1108
23. Kim SH, Han MC. Invasion of the urinary bladder by uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation with MR imaging. AJR 1997;168:393-397
24. Innocenti P, Pulli F, Savino L, et al. Staging of cervical cancer: reliability of transrectal US. Radiology 1992;185:201-205
25. Aoki S, Hata T, Senoh D, et al. Parametrial invasion of uterine cervical cancer assessed by transrectal ultrasound: preliminary report. Gynecol Oncol 1990;36:82-89
26. Iwamoto K, Kigawa J, Minagawa Y, Miura H, Terakawa N. Transvaginal ultrasongraphic diagnosis of bladder-wall invasion in patients with cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 1994;83:217-219
27. Kim SH, Choi BI, Kim JK, et al. Preoperative staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of CT and MRI in 99 patients. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993;17:633-640
28. Pannu HK, Corl FM, Fishman EK. CT evaluation of cervical cancer: spectrum of disease. Radio-Graphics 2001;21:1155-1168
29. Janus CL, Mendelson DS, Moore S, Gendal ES, Dottino P, Brodman M. Staging of cervical carcinoma: accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography. Clin Imaging 1989;13:114-116
30. Walsh JW, Goplerud DR. Prospective comparison between clinical and CT staging in primary cervical carcinoma. AJR 1981;137:997-1003
31. Vick CW, Walsh JW, Wheelock JB, Brewer WH. CT of the normal and abnormal parametria in cervical cancer. AJR 1984;143:597-603
32. Park JM, Charnsangavej C, Yoshimitsu K, Herron DH, Robinson TJ, Wallace S. Pathways of nodal metastasis from pelvic tumors: CT demonstration. Radio-Graphics 1994;14:1309-1321
33. Yang WT, Lam WW, Yu MY, Cheung TH, Metreweli C. Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma. AJR 2000; 175:759-766
34. Rose PG, Adler LP, Rodriguez M, Faulhaver PF, Abdul-Karim FW, Miraldi F. Positron emission tomography for evaluating para-aortic nodal metastasis in locally advanced cervical cancer before surgical staging: a surgicopathologic study. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:41-45
35. Narayan K, Hicks RJ, Jobling T, Bernshaw D, McKenzie AF. A comparison of MRI and PET scanning in surgically staged loco-regionally advanced cervical cancer: potential impact on treatment. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2001;11:263-271
36. Reinhardt MJ, Ehritt-Bruan C, Vogelgesang D, et al. Metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: detection with MR imaging and FDG PET. Radiology 2001;218:776-782
37. Halpin TF, Frick HC 2nd, Munnell EW. Critical points of failure in the therapy of cancer of the cervix: a reappraisal. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1972; 114:755-764
38. Burke TW, Hoskins WJ, Heller PB, Shen MC, Weiser EB, Park RC. Clinical patterns of tumor recurrence after radical hysterectomy in stage IB cervical carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 1987;69:382-385
39. Walsh JW, Amendola MA, Hall DJ, Tisnado J, Goplerud DR. Recurrent carcinoma of the cervix: CT diagnosis. AJR 1981;136:117-122
40. Heron CW, Husband JE, Williams MP, Dobbs HJ, Cosgrove DO. The value of CT in the diagnosis of recurrent carcinoma of the cervix. Clin Radiol 1988;39:496-501
41. Weber TM, Sostman DH, Spritzer CE, et al. Cervical carcinoma: determination of recurrent tumor extent versus radiation changes with MR imaging. Radiology 1995;194:135-139
42. Ebner F, Kressel HY, Mintz MC, et al. Tumor recurrence versus fibrosis in the female pelvis: differentiation with MR imaging at 1.5 T. Radiology 1988;166:333-340
43. Hawighorst H, Knapstein PG, Schaeffer U, et al. Pelvic lesions in patients with treated cervical carcinoma: efficacy of pharmacokinetic analysis of dynamic MR images in distinguishing recurrent tumors from benign conditions. AJR 1996;166:401-408
44. Kinkel K, Ariche M, Tardivon AA, et al. Differentiation between recurrent tumor and benign conditions after treatment of gynecologic pelvic carcinoma: value of dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging. Radiology 1997;204:55-63
45. Yamashita Y, Harada M, Torashima M, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of recurrent postoperative cervical cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996;6:167-171
46. Park DH, Kim KH, Park SY, Lee BH, Choi CW, Chin SY. Diagnosis of recurrent uterine cervical cancer: computed tomography versus positron emission tomography. Korean J Radiol 2000;1:51-55
47. Grigsby PW, Perez CA. Radiotherapy alone for medically inoperable carcinoma of the cervix: stage IA and carcinoma in situ. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991;21:375-378
48. Lanciano RM, Won M, Coia LR, Hanks GE. Pretreatment and treatment factors associated with improved outcome in squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a final report of the 1973 and 1978 patterns of care studies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991;20:667-676
49. National Institutes of Health. Office of Communications, National Cancer Institute Web site. Concurrent chemotherapy and radiation for cervical cancer. Available at: www.cancer.gov/newscenter/cervicalcancer. Accessed April 16, 2003
50. Flueckiger F, Ebner F, Poschauko H, Tamussino K, Einspieler R, Ranner G. Cervical cancer: serial MR imaging before and after primary radiation therapy a 2 year follow up study. Radiology 1992;184:89-93
51. Yamashita Y, Baba T, Baba Y, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of uterine cervical cancer: pharmacokinetic analysis with histopathologic correlation and its importance in predicting the outcome of radiation therapy. Radiology 2000;216:803-809