Current Concepts in the Diagnosis and Management of Endometrial and Cervical Carcinomas

Radiologic Clinics of North America

Volumn 51, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 1087-1110

  Tirumani, Sree Harsha ^a   Shanbhogue, Alampady K P ^b   Prasad, Srinivasa R ^c  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b BETH ISRAEL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

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

Author keywords

Cervical carcinoma; Endometrial carcinoma; International Federation of Gynecologic Oncology (FIGO); Magnetic resonance imaging

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; BETA CATENIN; CONTRAST MEDIUM; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; K RAS PROTEIN; PHOSPHATIDYLINOSITOL 3,4,5 TRISPHOSPHATE 3 PHOSPHATASE; PROTEIN E6; PROTEIN E7; PROTEIN P16; PROTEIN P53; RETINOBLASTOMA PROTEIN;

ADJUVANT THERAPY; BLADDER METASTASIS; BONE METASTASIS; BRACHYTHERAPY; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER STAGING; CARCINOGENESIS; COLON METASTASIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CTNNB GENE; CYTOREDUCTIVE SURGERY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; E6 GENE; E7 GENE; ECHOGRAPHY; ENDOMETRIUM CARCINOMA; FEMALE; GENE MUTATION; GYNECOLOGICAL EXAMINATION; HUMAN; HYSTERECTOMY; HYSTEROGRAPHY; LIVER METASTASIS; LUNG METASTASIS; LYMPH NODE DISSECTION; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; ONCOGENE; ONCOGENE K RAS; P16 GENE; P53 GENE; PARAAORTIC LYMPH NODE; PATIENT CARE; PELVIS LYMPHADENECTOMY; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PTEN GENE; RADICAL HYSTERECTOMY; RB GENE; REVIEW; SALPINGOOOPHORECTOMY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; TRANSVAGINAL ECHOGRAPHY; UNITED STATES; UTERINE CERVIX BIOPSY; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; WART VIRUS;

CERVICAL CARCINOMA; ENDOMETRIAL CARCINOMA; INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY (FIGO); MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING;

CONTRAST MEDIA; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ENDOMETRIAL NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; ULTRASONOGRAPHY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84887198417     PISSN: 00338389     EISSN: 15578275     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2013.07.003     Document Type: Review

References (71)

1. Hecht J.L., Mutter G.L. Molecular and pathologic aspects of endometrial carcinogenesis. JClin Oncol 2006, 24(29):4783-4791.
2. Siegel R., Naishadham D., Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 2012, 62(1):10-29.
3. Freeman S.J., Aly A.M., Kataoka M.Y., et al. The revised FIGO staging system for uterine malignancies: implications for MR imaging. Radiographics 2012, 32(6):1805-1827.
4. Jemal A., Bray F., Center M.M., et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2011, 61(2):69-90.
5. Nicolet V., Carignan L., Bourdon F., et al. MR imaging of cervical carcinoma: a practical staging approach. Radiographics 2000, 20(6):1539-1549.
6. Ledwaba T., Dlamini Z., Naicker S., et al. Molecular genetics of human cervical cancer: role of papillomavirus and the apoptotic cascade. Biol Chem 2004, 385(8):671-682.
7. Patel S., Liyanage S.H., Sahdev A., et al. Imaging of endometrial and cervical cancer. Insights Imaging 2010, 1(5-6):309-328.
8. Kaur H., Silverman P.M., Iyer R.B., et al. Diagnosis, staging, and surveillance of cervical carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003, 180(6):1621-1631.
9. Pecorelli S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009, 105(2):103-104.
10. Tirumani S.H., Ojili V., Shanbhogue A.K., et al. Current concepts in the imaging of uterine sarcoma. Abdom Imaging 2013, 38(2):397-411.
11. Ruangvutilert P., Sutantawibul A., Sunsaneevithayakul P., et al. Accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound for the evaluation of myometrial invasion in endometrial carcinoma. JMed Assoc Thai 2004, 87(1):47-52.
12. Takac I. Transvaginal ultrasonography with and without saline infusion in assessment of myometrial invasion of endometrial cancer. JUltrasound Med 2007, 26(7):949-955. [quiz: 56-7].
13. Alcazar J.L., Errasti T., Zornoza A. Saline infusion sonohysterography in endometrial cancer: assessment of malignant cells dissemination risk. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2000, 79(4):321-322.
14. Innocenti P., Pulli F., Savino L., et al. Staging of cervical cancer: reliability of transrectal US. Radiology 1992, 185(1):201-205.
15. Fischerova D., Cibula D., Stenhova H., et al. Transrectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in staging of early cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008, 18(4):766-772.
16. Iwamoto K., Kigawa J., Minagawa Y., et al. Transvaginal ultrasonographic diagnosis of bladder-wall invasion in patients with cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 1994, 83(2):217-219.
17. Hardesty L.A., Sumkin J.H., Hakim C., et al. The ability of helical CT to preoperatively stage endometrial carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001, 176(3):603-606.
18. Kim S.H., Kim H.D., Song Y.S., et al. Detection of deep myometrial invasion in endometrial carcinoma: comparison of transvaginal ultrasound, CT, and MRI. JComput Assist Tomogr 1995, 19(5):766-772.
19. Pannu H.K., Corl F.M., Fishman E.K. CT evaluation of cervical cancer: spectrum of disease. Radiographics 2001, 21(5):1155-1168.
20. Hori M., Kim T., Murakami T., et al. Uterine cervical carcinoma: preoperative staging with 3.0-T MR imaging-comparison with 1.5-T MR imaging. Radiology 2009, 251(1):96-104.
21. DeSouza N., Whittle M., Williams A., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the primary site in stage I cervical carcinoma: a comparison of endovaginal coil with external phased array coil techniques at 0.5 T. JMagn Reson Imaging 2000, 12(6):1020-1026.
22. Sala E., Rockall A.G., Freeman S.J., et al. The Added role of MR imaging in treatment stratification of patients with gynecologic malignancies: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiology 2013, 266(3):717-740.
23. Kinkel K., Forstner R., Danza F.M., et al. Staging of endometrial cancer with MRI: guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Imaging. Eur Radiol 2009, 19(7):1565-1574.
24. Balleyguier C., Sala E., Da Cunha T., et al. Staging of uterine cervical cancer with MRI: guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Eur Radiol 2011, 21(5):1102-1110.
25. Nougaret S., Tirumani S.H., Addley H., et al. Pearls and pitfalls in MRI of gynecologic malignancy with diffusion-weighted technique. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013, 200(2):261-276.
26. Sala E., Crawford R., Senior E., et al. Added value of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in predicting advanced stage disease in patients with endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2009, 19(1):141-146.
27. Beddy P., Moyle P., Kataoka M., et al. Evaluation of depth of myometrial invasion and overall staging in endometrial cancer: comparison of diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 2012, 262(2):530-537.
28. Manfredi R., Mirk P., Maresca G., et al. Local-regional staging of endometrial carcinoma: role of MR imaging in surgical planning. Radiology 2004, 231(2):372-378.
29. Zandrino F., La Paglia E., Musante F. Magnetic resonance imaging in local staging of endometrial carcinoma: diagnostic performance, pitfalls, and literature review. Tumori 2010, 96(4):601-608.
30. Inubashiri E., Hata K., Kanenishi K., et al. Positron emission tomography with the glucose analog [F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose for evaluating pelvic lymph node metastasis in uterine corpus cancer: comparison with CT and MRI findings. JObstet Gynaecol Res 2009, 35(1):26-34.
31. Wagenaar 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 2001, 82(3):474-482.
32. Sahdev A., Sohaib S.A., Wenaden A.E., et al. The performance of magnetic resonance imaging in early cervical carcinoma: a long-term experience. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2007, 17(3):629-636.
33. Zand K.R., Reinhold C., Abe H., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the cervix. Cancer Imaging 2007, 7(1):69.
34. Chung H.H., Kang S.B., Cho J.Y., et al. Can preoperative MRI accurately evaluate nodal and parametrial invasion in early stage cervical cancer?. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2007, 37(5):370-375.
35. Shweel M.A., Abdel-Gawad E.A., Abdel-Gawad E.A., et al. Uterine cervical malignancy: diagnostic accuracy of MRI with histopathologic correlation. JClin Imaging Sci 2012, 2:42.
36. Park W., Park Y.J., Huh S.J., et al. The usefulness of MRI and PET imaging for the detection of parametrial involvement and lymph node metastasis in patients with cervical cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2005, 35(5):260-264.
37. Hricak H., Yu K.K. Radiology in invasive cervical cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996, 167(5):1101-1108.
38. Togashi K., Morikawa K., Kataoka M.L., et al. Cervical cancer. JMagn Reson Imaging 1998, 8(2):391-397.
39. Kim S.H., Han M.C. Invasion of the urinary bladder by uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation with MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997, 168(2):393-397.
40. Harry V.N. Novel imaging techniques as response biomarkers in cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2010, 116(2):253-261.
41. Leach M.O., Brindle K.M., Evelhoch J.L., et al. The assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapies in early-stage clinical trials using magnetic resonance imaging: issues and recommendations. Br J Cancer 2005, 92(9):1599-1610.
42. Payne G.S., Schmidt M., Morgan V.A., et al. Evaluation ofmagnetic resonance diffusion and spectroscopy measurements as predictive biomarkers in stage 1 cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2010, 116(2):246-252.
43. Liu Y., Bai R., Sun H., et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging in predicting and monitoring the response of uterine cervical cancer to combined chemoradiation. Clin Radiol 2009, 64(11):1067-1074.
44. Zietkowski D., Davidson R., Eykyn T., et al. Detection of cancer in cervical tissue biopsies using mobile lipid resonances measured with diffusion-weighted 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopy. NMR Biomed 2010, 23(4):382-390.
45. Downey K., deSouza N.M. Imaging cervical cancer: recent advances and future directions. Curr Opin Oncol 2011, 23(5):519-525.
46. Xue F., Lin L.L., Dehdashti F., et al. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in primary cervical cancer as an indicator of prognosis after radiation therapy. Gynecol Oncol 2006, 101(1):147-151.
47. Grigsby P.W., Siegel B.A., Dehdashti F. Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. JClin Oncol 2001, 19(17):3745-3749.
48. 18F-FDG PET for detection of paraaortic lymph node metastases in cervical cancer patients. JNucl Med 2003, 44(11):1775-1783.
49. Pandit-Taskar N. Oncologic imaging in gynecologic malignancies. JNucl Med 2005, 46(11):1842-1850.
50. Colombo N., Preti E., Landoni F., et al. Endometrial cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2011, 22(Suppl 6):vi35-vi39.
51. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology endometrial cancer version 1. 2013. Available at: Accessed March 21, 2013. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/uterine.pdf.
52. Lee K.B., Ki K.D., Lee J.M., et al. The risk of lymph node metastasis based on myometrial invasion and tumor grade in endometrioid uterine cancers: a multicenter, retrospective Korean study. Ann Surg Oncol 2009, 16(10):2882-2887.
53. Reznek R.H., Sahdev A. MR imaging in cervical cancer: seeing is believing. The 2004 Mackenzie Davidson Memorial Lecture. Br J Radiol 2005, 78(Spec No 2):S73-S85.
54. Sheu M.H., Chang C.Y., Wang J.H., et al. Cervical carcinoma: assessment of parametrial invasion and lymph node metastasis with magnetic resonance imaging. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi (Taipei) 2000, 63(8):634-640.
55. Bipat S., Glas A.S., van der Velden J., et al. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol 2003, 91(1):59-66.
56. Subak L.L., Hricak H., Powell C.B., et al. Cervical carcinoma: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstet Gynecol 1995, 86(1):43-50.
57. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology cervical cancer version 2. 2013. Available at: Accessed March 21, 2013. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/cervical.pdf.
58. Reinhardt M.J., Ehritt-Braun C., Vogelgesang D., et al. Metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: detection with MR imaging and FDG PET. Radiology 2001, 218(3):776-782.
59. Morrow C.P., Bundy B.N., Kurman R.J., et al. Relationship between surgical-pathological risk factors and outcome in clinical stage I and II carcinoma of the endometrium: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 1991, 40(1):55-65.
60. Chi D., Barakat R., Palayekar M., et al. The incidence of pelvic lymph node metastasis by FIGO staging for patients with adequately surgically staged endometrial adenocarcinoma of endometrioid histology. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008, 18(2):269-273.
61. McMeekin D.S., Lashbrook D., Gold M., et al. Nodal distribution and its significance in FIGO stage IIIc endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2001, 82(2):375-379.
62. Lai G., Rockall A.G. Lymph node imaging in gynecologic malignancy. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2010, 31(5):363.
63. Delgado G., Bundy B., Fowler W., et al. A prospective surgical pathological study of stage I squamous carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Gynecol Oncol 1989, 35(3):314-320.
64. Yang W.T., Lam W.W., Yu M.Y., et al. Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000, 175(3):759-766.
65. 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with endometrial cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008, 190(6):1652-1658.
66. Choi H.J., Roh J.W., Seo S.S., et al. Comparison of the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the presurgical detection of lymph node metastases in patients with uterine cervical carcinoma. Cancer 2006, 106(4):914-922.
67. Rockall A.G., Sohaib S.A., Harisinghani M.G., et al. Diagnostic performance of nanoparticle-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of lymph node metastases in patients with endometrial and cervical cancer. JClin Oncol 2005, 23(12):2813-2821.
68. 18F] FDG PET/CT for the management of recurrent endometrial cancer: correlation with clinical and histological findings. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008, 35(6):1081-1088.
69. Park J.Y., Kim E.N., Kim D.Y., et al. Clinical impact of positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the posttherapy surveillance of endometrial carcinoma: evaluation of 88 patients. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008, 18(6):1332-1338.
70. Rockall A.G., Cross S., Flanagan S., et al. The role of FDG-PET/CT in gynaecological cancers. Cancer Imaging 2012, 12:49-65.
71. 18F-FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. JNucl Med 2003, 44(3):347-352.