Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology 2/2019

24.09.2018

Detection of recurrent pancreatic cancer: value of second-opinion interpretations of cross-sectional images by subspecialized radiologists

verfasst von: Sandra Huicochea Castellanos, Giuseppe Corrias, Gary A. Ulaner, Mark Dunphy, Zheng Junting, Marinela Capanu, Vinod Balachandran, Romina Grazia Giancipoli, Serena Monti, Lorenzo Mannelli

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 2/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the value of second-opinion interpretation of cross-sectional images by subspecialized radiologists to diagnose recurrent pancreatic cancer after surgery.

Methods

The IRB approved and issued a waiver of informed consent for this retrospective study. Initial and second-opinion interpretations of 69 consecutive submitted MRI or CT follow-up after pancreatic cancer resection between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2013 were evaluated by one oncologic imaging radiologist, who was blinded to patient’s clinical details and histopathologic data. The reviewer was asked to classify each interpretation in reference of the diagnosis of PDAC recurrence. It was also recorded if the radiologic interpretation recommended additional imaging studies to confirm recurrence. The diagnosis of recurrence was determined by pathology when available, otherwise by imaging follow-up, clinical, or laboratory assessments. Cohen’s kappa statistic was used to assess agreement between initial and second-opinion interpretations. The differences between the initial and second-opinion interpretations were examined using McNemar test or Bowker’s test of symmetry.

Results

Disagreement on recurrence between the initial report and the second-opinion interpretation was observed in 32% of cases (22/69; k = 0.44). Second-opinion interpretations had a higher sensitivity and a higher specificity on recurrence compared to the initial interpretations (0.93 vs. 0.75 and 0.90 vs. 0.68, respectively), and the difference in specificity was significant (p = 0.016). Additional imaging studies were recommended more frequently in the initial interpretation (22% vs. 6%, p = 0.006).

Conclusions

Our study shows the second-opinion interpretation by subspecialized radiologists improves the detection of pancreatic cancer recurrence after surgical resection.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Sener SF, Fremgen A, Menck HR, Winchester DP (1999) Pancreatic cancer: a report of treatment and survival trends for 100,313 patients diagnosed from 1985–1995, using the National Cancer Database. J Am Coll Surg. 189:1–7CrossRefPubMed Sener SF, Fremgen A, Menck HR, Winchester DP (1999) Pancreatic cancer: a report of treatment and survival trends for 100,313 patients diagnosed from 1985–1995, using the National Cancer Database. J Am Coll Surg. 189:1–7CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat O’Reilly EM, Lowery MA (2012) Postresection surveillance for pancreatic cancer performance status, imaging, and serum markers. Cancer J. 18:609–613CrossRefPubMed O’Reilly EM, Lowery MA (2012) Postresection surveillance for pancreatic cancer performance status, imaging, and serum markers. Cancer J. 18:609–613CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Nordby T, Hugenschmidt H, Fagerland MW, et al. (2013) Follow-up after curative surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: asymptomatic recurrence is associated with improved survival. Eur J Surg Oncol. 39:559–566CrossRefPubMed Nordby T, Hugenschmidt H, Fagerland MW, et al. (2013) Follow-up after curative surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: asymptomatic recurrence is associated with improved survival. Eur J Surg Oncol. 39:559–566CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Elmi A, Murphy J, Hedgire S, et al. (2017) Post-Whipple imaging in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: association with overall survival: a multivariate analysis. Abdom Radiol. 42:2101–2107CrossRef Elmi A, Murphy J, Hedgire S, et al. (2017) Post-Whipple imaging in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: association with overall survival: a multivariate analysis. Abdom Radiol. 42:2101–2107CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Tzeng CW, Fleming JB, Lee JE, et al. (2012) Yield of clinical and radiographic surveillance in patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma following multimodal therapy. HPB. 14:365–372CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Tzeng CW, Fleming JB, Lee JE, et al. (2012) Yield of clinical and radiographic surveillance in patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma following multimodal therapy. HPB. 14:365–372CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Tjaden C, Michalski CW, Strobel O, et al. (2016) Clinical impact of structured follow-up after pancreatic surgery. Pancreas. 45:895–899CrossRefPubMed Tjaden C, Michalski CW, Strobel O, et al. (2016) Clinical impact of structured follow-up after pancreatic surgery. Pancreas. 45:895–899CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Sheffield KM, Crowell KT, Lin YL, et al. (2012) Surveillance of pancreatic cancer patients after surgical resection. Ann Surg Oncol. 19(5):1670–1677CrossRefPubMed Sheffield KM, Crowell KT, Lin YL, et al. (2012) Surveillance of pancreatic cancer patients after surgical resection. Ann Surg Oncol. 19(5):1670–1677CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Hatzoglou V, Omuro AM, Haque S, et al. (2016) Second-opinion interpretations of neuroimaging studies by oncologic neuroradiologists can help reduce errors in cancer care. Cancer. 122:2708–2714CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hatzoglou V, Omuro AM, Haque S, et al. (2016) Second-opinion interpretations of neuroimaging studies by oncologic neuroradiologists can help reduce errors in cancer care. Cancer. 122:2708–2714CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Lakhman Y, D’Anastasi M, Miccò M, et al. (2016) Second-opinion interpretations of gynecologic oncologic MRI examinations by sub-specialized radiologists influence patient care. Eur Radiol. 26:2089–2098CrossRefPubMed Lakhman Y, D’Anastasi M, Miccò M, et al. (2016) Second-opinion interpretations of gynecologic oncologic MRI examinations by sub-specialized radiologists influence patient care. Eur Radiol. 26:2089–2098CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Loevner LA, Sonners AI, Schulman BJ, et al. (2002) Reinterpretation of cross-sectional images in patients with head and neck cancer in the setting of a multidisciplinary cancer center. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 23:1622–1626PubMed Loevner LA, Sonners AI, Schulman BJ, et al. (2002) Reinterpretation of cross-sectional images in patients with head and neck cancer in the setting of a multidisciplinary cancer center. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 23:1622–1626PubMed
12.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Mortelé KJ, Lemmerling M, de Hemptinne B, et al. (2000) Postoperative findings following the Whipple procedure: determination of prevalence and morphologic abdominal CT features. Eur Radiol. 10:123–128CrossRefPubMed Mortelé KJ, Lemmerling M, de Hemptinne B, et al. (2000) Postoperative findings following the Whipple procedure: determination of prevalence and morphologic abdominal CT features. Eur Radiol. 10:123–128CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Yamauchi FI, Ortega CD, Blasbalg R, et al. (2012) Multidetector CT evaluation of the postoperative pancreas. Radiographics. 32:743–764CrossRefPubMed Yamauchi FI, Ortega CD, Blasbalg R, et al. (2012) Multidetector CT evaluation of the postoperative pancreas. Radiographics. 32:743–764CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Heye T, Zausig N, Klauss M, et al. (2011) CT diagnosis of recurrence after pancreatic cancer: is there a pattern? World J Gastroenterol. 17:1126–1134CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Heye T, Zausig N, Klauss M, et al. (2011) CT diagnosis of recurrence after pancreatic cancer: is there a pattern? World J Gastroenterol. 17:1126–1134CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Hamidian Jahromi A, Sangster G, Zibari G, et al. (2013) Accuracy of multi-detector computed tomography, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-CT, and CA 19-9 levels in detecting recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma. JOP. 14:466–468PubMed Hamidian Jahromi A, Sangster G, Zibari G, et al. (2013) Accuracy of multi-detector computed tomography, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-CT, and CA 19-9 levels in detecting recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma. JOP. 14:466–468PubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. (2010) Performance of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent pancreatic cancer: comparison with integrated FDG-PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT and enhanced CT. Mol Imaging Biol. 12:452–459CrossRefPubMed Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. (2010) Performance of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent pancreatic cancer: comparison with integrated FDG-PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT and enhanced CT. Mol Imaging Biol. 12:452–459CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Morisaka H, et al. (2011) Detection of pancreatic carcinoma and liver metastases with gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging: comparison with contrast-enhanced multi-detector row CT. Radiology. 260:446–453CrossRefPubMed Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Morisaka H, et al. (2011) Detection of pancreatic carcinoma and liver metastases with gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging: comparison with contrast-enhanced multi-detector row CT. Radiology. 260:446–453CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Wibmer A, Vargas HA, Donahue TF, et al. (2015) Diagnosis of extracapsular extension of prostate cancer on prostate MRI: impact of second-opinion readings by subspecialized genitourinary oncologic radiologists. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 205:W73–W78CrossRefPubMed Wibmer A, Vargas HA, Donahue TF, et al. (2015) Diagnosis of extracapsular extension of prostate cancer on prostate MRI: impact of second-opinion readings by subspecialized genitourinary oncologic radiologists. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 205:W73–W78CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Lysack JT, Hoy M, Hudon ME, et al. (2013) Impact of neuroradiologist second opinion on staging and management of head and neck cancer. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 5(42):39CrossRef Lysack JT, Hoy M, Hudon ME, et al. (2013) Impact of neuroradiologist second opinion on staging and management of head and neck cancer. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 5(42):39CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Sistrom CL, Dreyer KJ, Dang PP, et al. (2009) Recommendations for additional imaging in radiology reports: multifactorial analysis of 5.9 million examinations. Radiology. 253:453–461CrossRefPubMed Sistrom CL, Dreyer KJ, Dang PP, et al. (2009) Recommendations for additional imaging in radiology reports: multifactorial analysis of 5.9 million examinations. Radiology. 253:453–461CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Shinagare AB, Shyn PB, Sadow CA, Wasser EJ, Catalano P (2013) Incidence, appropriateness, and consequences of recommendations for additional imaging tests in oncological PET/CT reports. Clin Radiol. 68(155–61):24 Shinagare AB, Shyn PB, Sadow CA, Wasser EJ, Catalano P (2013) Incidence, appropriateness, and consequences of recommendations for additional imaging tests in oncological PET/CT reports. Clin Radiol. 68(155–61):24
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Blaivas M, Lyon M (2007) Frequency of radiology self-referral in abdominal computed tomographic scans and the implied cost. Am J Emerg Med 25:396–399CrossRefPubMed Blaivas M, Lyon M (2007) Frequency of radiology self-referral in abdominal computed tomographic scans and the implied cost. Am J Emerg Med 25:396–399CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Corrias G, Huicochea Castellanos S, Merkow R, et al. (2018) Does second reader opinion affect patient management in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma? Acad Radiol. 25(7):825–832CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Corrias G, Huicochea Castellanos S, Merkow R, et al. (2018) Does second reader opinion affect patient management in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma? Acad Radiol. 25(7):825–832CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Hendee WR, Becker GJ, Borgstede JP, et al. (2010) Addressing overutilization in medical imaging. Radiology. 257:240–245CrossRefPubMed Hendee WR, Becker GJ, Borgstede JP, et al. (2010) Addressing overutilization in medical imaging. Radiology. 257:240–245CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Kalbhen CL, Yetter EM, Olson MC, Posniak HV, Aranha GV (1998) Assessing the resectability of pancreatic carcinoma: the value of reinterpreting abdominal CT performed at other institutions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 171:1571–1576CrossRefPubMed Kalbhen CL, Yetter EM, Olson MC, Posniak HV, Aranha GV (1998) Assessing the resectability of pancreatic carcinoma: the value of reinterpreting abdominal CT performed at other institutions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 171:1571–1576CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Detection of recurrent pancreatic cancer: value of second-opinion interpretations of cross-sectional images by subspecialized radiologists
verfasst von
Sandra Huicochea Castellanos
Giuseppe Corrias
Gary A. Ulaner
Mark Dunphy
Zheng Junting
Marinela Capanu
Vinod Balachandran
Romina Grazia Giancipoli
Serena Monti
Lorenzo Mannelli
Publikationsdatum
24.09.2018
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 2/2019
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1765-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2019

Abdominal Radiology 2/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.