Magnetic resonance imaging in carcinoma cervix- does it have a prognostic relevance

Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics

Volumn 1, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 103-107

  Sethi, T K ^a   Bhalla, N K ^a   Jena, A N ^a   Rawat, S ^a   Oberoi, R ^a  

^a RAJIV GANDHI CANCER INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTRE   (India)

Author keywords

Cervical carcinoma; M. R. I.; Radiotherapy

Indexed keywords

EID: 24644433106     PISSN: 09731482     EISSN: 09731482     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4103/0973-1482.16710     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. National Cancer Registry Programme. Consolidated report of the population based cancer registries, 1990-1996. Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi. Edn. 2001.
2. Kodaira T, Fuwa N, Toita T. Comparison of prognostic value of MRI and FIGO stage among patients with cervical carcinoma treated with radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;56:769-77.
3. Burghardt E, Hofmann HMH, Ebner F. Magnetic resonance imaging in cervical cancer: A basis for objective classification. Gynecol Oncol 1989;33:61-7.
4. Hawnaur JM, Johnson RJ, Buckley CH. Staging, volume estimation, and assessment of nodal status in carcinoma of the cervix. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging with surgical findings. Clin Radiol 1994;49:443-52.
5. Mayr NA, Magnotta VA, Ehrhardt JC. Usefulness of tumor volumetry by magnetic resonance imaging in assessing response to radiation therapy in carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996;35:915-24.
6. Hricak H, Quivey JM, Campos Z. Carcinoma of the cervix : Predictive value of clinical and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging assessment of prognostic factors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993;27:791-801.
7. Eifel P, Morris M, Wharton J, Oswald M. The influence of tumor size and morphology on the outcome of patients with FIGO stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1994;29:9-16.
8. Perez CA, Gringsby PW, Nene SM. Effect of tumor size on the prognosis of carcinoma of the uterine cervix treated with irradiation alone. Cancer 1992;69:2796-806.
9. Kovalic JJ, Perez CA, Grigsby PW. The effect of volume of disease in patients with carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991;21:905-10.
10. Flucckiger F, Ebner F, Poschauko H. Cervical cancer: Serial MR imaging before and after primary radiation therapy-a 2-year follow-up study. Radiology 1992;184:89-93.
11. Ebner F, Kressel HY, Mintz MC. Tumour recurrence versus fibrosis in the female pelvis: Differentiation with MR imaging at 1.5 T. Radiology 1988;166:333-40.
12. Hatano K, Sekiya Y, Araki H. Evaluation of the therapeutic effect of radiotherapy on cervical cancer using magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;45:639-44.
13. Togashi K, Nishimura K, Sagoh T. Carcinoma of the cervix: staging with MR imaging. Radiology 1989;171:245-51.
14. Kim SH, Choi BI, Lee HP. Uterine cervical carcinoma: Comparison of CT and MR findings. Radiology 1990;175:45-51.
15. Toita T, Kakinohana Y, Shinzato S. Tumor diameter/volume and pelvic node status assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for uterine cervical cancer treated with irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;43:777-82.
16. Scheidler J, Hricak H, Yu KK. Radiological evaluation of lymph node metastases in patients with cervical cancer. A meta-analysis. JAMA 1997;278:1096-101.
17. Hricak H, Chang YCF. Female pelvis. In: Syllabus: A categorical course in diagnostic radiology/MR imaging. Stark DD, Bradley JR, Des WC. editors. Oakbrook, II: Radiological Society of North American. Inc.; 1988. p. 141-8.
18. Mayr NA, Yuh WT, Zheng J. Tumor size evaluated by pelvic examination compared with 3-D quantitative analysis in the prediction of outcome for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997;39:395-404.