The validity of tumour diameter assessed by magnetic resonance imaging and gross specimen with regard to tumour volume in cervical cancer patients

European Journal of Cancer

Volumn 44, Issue 11, 2008, Pages 1524-1528

  Jung, Dae Chul ^a   Ju, Woong ^b   Choi, Hyuck Jae ^c   Kang, Sokbom ^a   Park, Sohee ^a   Yoo, Chong Woo ^a   Park, Sang Yoon ^a  

^a National Cancer Center   (South Korea)

^b Ewha Womans University   (South Korea)

^c University of Ulsan   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Cervical cancer; Magnetic resonance imaging; Tumour diameter

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER STAGING; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADICAL HYSTERECTOMY; TUMOR VOLUME; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

ADULT; CARCINOMA; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TUMOR BURDEN; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 46049099974     PISSN: 09598049     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.04.023     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Parkin D.M., Bray F., Ferlay J., et al. Estimating the world cancer burden: Globocan 2000. Int J Cancer 94 (2001) 153-156
2. Landoni F., Maneo A., Colombo A., et al. Randomised study of radical surgery versus radiotherapy for stage Ib-IIa cervical cancer. Lancet 350 (1997) 535-540
3. Hawnaur J.M., Johnson R.J., Buckley C.H., et al. Staging, volume estimastion and assessment of nodal status in carcinoma of the cervix: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging with surgical findings. Clin Radiol 49 (1994) 443-452
4. Mayr N.A., magnotta V.A., Ehrhardt J.C., et al. Usefulness of volumetry by magnetic resonance imaging in assessing response to radiation therapy in carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 35 (1996) 915-924
5. Vorgias G., Katsoulis M., Argyrou K., et al. Preoperative imaging of primary intra-abdominal gynaecological malignancies: Diagnostic accuracy of CT-scan and MRI-a greek cohort study. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 23 (2002) 139-144
6. Pete I., Godeny M., Toth E., et al. Prediction of cervical infiltration in stage II endometrial cancer by different preoperative evaluation techniques (D& C, US, CT, MRI). Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 24 (2003) 517-522
7. Wagenar H.C., Trimbos J.B., Postema S., et al. Tumor diameter and volume assessed by magnetic resonance imaging in the prediction of outcome for invasive cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 82 (2001) 474-482
8. Van Nagell J.R., Roddick Jr. J.W., and Lowin D.M. The staging of cervical caner: inevitable discreancies between clinical staging and pathologic findings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 110 (1971) 973-978
9. http://www-class.unl.edu/psycrs/statpage/comp.html.
10. Van Nagell J.R., Roddick Jr. J.W., and Lowin D.M. The staging of cervical caner: inevitable discreancies between clinical staging and pathologic findings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 110 (1971) 973-978
11. Averette H.E., Ford Jr. J.H., Dudan R.C., et al. Staging of cervical cancer. Clin Ogstet Gynecol 18 (1975) 215-232
12. Lagasse L.D., Creasman W.T., Shingleton H.M., et al. Results and complications of operative staging in cervical cancer: experience of the Gynecologi Oncology Group. Gynecol Oncol 9 (1980) 90-98
13. Creasman W.T. New gynecologic cancer staging. Gynecol Oncol 58 (1995) 157-158
14. Mayr N.A., Magnotta V.A., Ehrhardt J.C., et al. Usefulness of volumetry by magnetic resonance imaging in assessing response to radiation therapy in carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 35 (1996) 915-924
15. Hricak H., Quivey J.M., Campos Z., et al. Carcinoma of the cervix: predictive value of clinical and magnetic resonance imaging assessment of prognostic factors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 27 (1993) 791-801
16. Subak L.L., Hricak H., Powell C.D., et al. Cervical carcinoma: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstet Gynecol 86 (1995) 43-50
17. Hricak H., and Yu K.K. Radiology in invasive cervical cancer. Review article. Am J Roentgenol 167 (1996) 1101-1108
18. Mitchell D.G., Snyder B., Coakley F., et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: tumor delineation by magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and clinical examination, verified by pathological results, in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 Intergroup Study. J Clin Oncol 24 (2006) 5687-5694
19. Rosai J. Surgical pathology. 9th ed. (2004), Mosby, New York, USA pp. 2974-2975
20. Lester S.C. Manual of surgical pathology. 2nd ed. (2006), Elsevier, Philadelphia, USA pp. 425-428
21. Burghardt E., Hofmann H.M.H., Ebner F., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in cervical cancer: a basis for objective classification. Gynecol Oncol 33 (1989) 61-67
22. Ebner F., Tamussino K., and Kressel H.Y. Magnetic resnonance imaging in cervical carcinoma: diagnosis, staging, and follow-up. Magn Reson Q 10 (1994) 22-42
23. Fischetti S.G., Politi G., Lomeo E., et al. Carcinoma of the uterine cervical canal. Staging and biometric assessment with magnetic resonance. Radiol Med (Torino) 88 (1994) 445-452