Literature DB >> 20566802

Quantitative imaging in oncology patients: Part 1, radiology practice patterns at major U.S. cancer centers.

Tracy A Jaffe1, Nicholas W Wickersham, Daniel C Sullivan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to examine radiologists' opinions and practice patterns concerning tumor measurements in cancer patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic mail survey was sent to 565 abdominal imaging radiologists at 55 U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI)-funded cancer centers. The survey contained questions about departmental demographics, procedures for interpretation of imaging in oncologic patients, and opinions concerning the role of radiologists in using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) system for tumor measurements.
RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-six responses (52%) were received. The distribution of the size of the respondents' abdominal imaging groups was as follows: 1-5 (16/295, 5%), 6-10 (112/295, 38%), 11-15 (77/295, 26%), and > 20 (73/295, 25%). Most respondents dictate some but not all tumor measurements in the first clinical scan (236/270, 87%). For follow-up imaging, 95% (255/268) of respondents dictate tumor measurements for selected index lesions. Most respondents believe inclusion of tumor measurements in the first scan is the responsibility of the radiologist (248/262, 95%). Ninety percent of respondents (235/261) believe inclusion of several index lesion measurements is satisfactory to document disease activity. Eighty-two percent (214/260) of respondents were familiar with RECIST. Forty-two percent (110/262) of respondents' departments have a centralized process for approval of industry-sponsored oncologic trials in which imaging is an important component of the protocol end point.
CONCLUSION: Most oncologic imaging at NCI-sponsored cancer centers includes tumor measurements on initial and follow-up imaging. Very few radiology departments have a centralized process for approval of clinical trial protocols that require imaging.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20566802     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.09.2850

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  19 in total

1.  3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network.

Authors:  Andriy Fedorov; Reinhard Beichel; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Julien Finet; Jean-Christophe Fillion-Robin; Sonia Pujol; Christian Bauer; Dominique Jennings; Fiona Fennessy; Milan Sonka; John Buatti; Stephen Aylward; James V Miller; Steve Pieper; Ron Kikinis
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 2.546

2.  Natural Language Processing Techniques for Extracting and Categorizing Finding Measurements in Narrative Radiology Reports.

Authors:  M Sevenster; J Buurman; P Liu; J F Peters; P J Chang
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2015-09-30       Impact factor: 2.342

3.  Quantitative Radiology Reporting in Oncology: Survey of Oncologists and Radiologists.

Authors:  Les R Folio; Chelsye J Nelson; Menashe Benjamin; Ayelet Ran; Guy Engelhard; David A Bluemke
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 4.  Imaging informatics: essential tools for the delivery of imaging services.

Authors:  David S Mendelson; Daniel L Rubin
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 5.  Current and future trends in imaging informatics for oncology.

Authors:  Mia A Levy; Daniel L Rubin
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.360

6.  Comparison of manual and semi-automatic measuring techniques in MSCT scans of patients with lymphoma: a multicentre study.

Authors:  A J Höink; J Weßling; R Koch; C Schülke; N Kohlhase; L Wassenaar; R M Mesters; M D'Anastasi; M Fabel; A Wulff; D Pinto dos Santos; A Kießling; A Graser; V Dicken; M Karpitschka; L Bornemann; W Heindel; B Buerke
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-09-06       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Automatically pairing measured findings across narrative abdomen CT reports.

Authors:  Merlijn Sevenster; Jeffrey Bozeman; Andrea Cowhy; William Trost
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2013-11-16

8.  Informatics in radiology: improving clinical work flow through an AIM database: a sample web-based lesion tracking application.

Authors:  Aaron C Abajian; Mia Levy; Daniel L Rubin
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 5.333

Review 9.  Multimedia-enhanced Radiology Reports: Concept, Components, and Challenges.

Authors:  Les R Folio; Laura B Machado; Andrew J Dwyer
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2018 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.333

10.  Automated tracking of quantitative assessments of tumor burden in clinical trials.

Authors:  Daniel L Rubin; Debra Willrett; Martin J O'Connor; Cleber Hage; Camille Kurtz; Dilvan A Moreira
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 4.243

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.