ObjectiveTo examine the performance of T2-weighted (T2W) and diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for detecting the index tumour in patients with prostate cancer and to examine the agreement between MRI and histology when assessing tumour volume (TV) and overall tumour burden. Patients and MethodsThe study included 199 consecutive patients with biopsy confirmed prostate cancer randomised to MRI before radical prostatectomy from December 2009 to July 2012. MRI-detected tumours (MRTs) were ranked from 1 to 3 according to decreasing volume and were compared with histologically detected tumours (HTs) ranked from 1 to 3, with HT 1 = index tumour. Whole-mount section histology was used as a reference standard. The TVs of true-positive MRTs (MRTVs 1-3) were compared with the TVs found by histology (HTVs 1-3). All tumours were registered on a 30-sector map and by classifying each sector as positive/negative, the rate of true-positive and -negative sectors was calculated. ResultsThe detection rate for the HT 1 (index tumour) was 92%; HT 2, 45%; and HT 3, 37%. The MRTV 1-3 vs the HTV 1-3 were 2.8 mL vs 4.0 mL (index tumour, P < 0.001), 1.0 mL vs 0.9 mL (tumour 2, P = 0.413), and 0.6 mL vs 0.5 mL (tumour 3, P = 0.492). The rate of true-positive and -negative sectors was 50% and 88%, κ = 0.39. ConclusionA combination of T2W and DW MRI detects the index tumour in 92% of cases, although MRI underestimates both TV and tumour burden compared with histology.

This study could not demonstrate a definite benefit of performing magnetic resonance imaging before surgery for all patients. However, there was a possible improved result in patients in which physical examination could not detect the cancer.

Anal cancer is a rare disease with increasing incidence 1,2 and chemoradiotherapy is the recommended curative treatment. 3 State-of-the-art radiotherapy is delivered as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with concomitant mitomycin (MMC) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) chemotherapy. 4,5 Different treatment regimens are used based on tumor and lymph node stage. 3 Complete tumor remission may be achieved in up to 90% of the patients and the 3 year progression-free survival is around 70%. 6 Recurrences are mostly locoregional 7,8 and curatively intended salvage surgery usually involves extensive pelvic surgery. 9 The majority of anal squamous cell carcinomas are HPV positive, and HPV status is both a prognostic factor and predictive of treatment outcome. 10,11 Other clinicopathological features such as gender, tumor and lymph node stage, radiotherapy dose, and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes have shown prognostic value, 11-13 but there is currently no

No abstract

ObjectiveThe objective of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for detecting uni- and bilateral extraprostatic disease (T3) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa).Materials and methodsThis prospective study included 199 patients with biopsy-proven PCa who underwent MRI prior to radical prostatectomy from December 2009 to July 2012. Extraprostatic extension and seminal vesicle invasion represented T3 disease, and was classified as uni- (right or left) or bilateral. MRI detection of T3 disease was assessed by descriptive statistics and odds ratio (OR). Whole-mount histopathology was used as the reference standard.ResultsThe overall prevalence of pT3 was 105/199 (53 %), unilateral in 81/105 (77 %) and bilateral in 24/105 (23 %). The sensitivity of MRI for predicting pT3 was 76/105 (72 %), specificity 61/94 (65 %), accuracy 137/199 (69 %), and OR 4.8 (95 % CI 2.7–8.8). A complete match with respect to the laterality of pT3 was found in 52/105 (50 %), and the side-specific accuracy was 113/199 (57 %). When unilateral pT3 was found, MRI falsely suggested contralateral T3 in 4/81 (5 %) and bilateral in 8/81 (10 %). When bilateral pT3 was found, MRI falsely suggested unilateral T3 in 12/24 (50 %).ConclusionMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) detected 72 % of all patients with T3 disease, and the accuracy dropped from 69 to 57 % when considering the laterality of T3. Thus far, the MRI technique is not yet adequate to meet the increasing demands of accurate diagnosis of locally advanced disease, and the contemporary MRI staging should be careful.

DWI is highly sensitive for detecting radiorecurrent prostate cancer, and a few targeted biopsies may confirm a positive diagnosis. However, random biopsies may assess the tumor burden more exactly.

No abstract

Introduction Because individuals with serrated polyps and adenomas are at increased risk of developing new polyps and colorectal cancer (CRC), surveillance after resection is justified. After adenoma resection, most international guidelines are consistent, but recommendations for surveillance after serrated polyp resection vary. The United States Multi-Society Taskforce on CRC (US-MSTF) base surveillance intervals on serrated polyp subtype (traditional serrated adenoma, sessile serrated polyp, hyperplastic polyps), while the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines do not take serrated polyp subtype into account. We evaluated the implications of this difference in a primary colonoscopy screening cohort. Methods We included participants from a large colonoscopy screening trial. In a post-hoc simulation, assuming full protocol adherence, we determined the surveillance interval for each subject based on their polyp burden, using the most recent US-MSTF and ESGE guidelines. Results We included 5323 participants, of whom 1228 had one or more serrated polyps. In 5201 of all participants (98 %; Cohen’s kappa 0.90) and in 1106 of those with serrated polyps (90 %; Cohen’s kappa 0.80), both guidelines recommended identical surveillance intervals. Recommendations for a 3-year surveillance interval were identical between the two guidelines. All 122 subjects with discordant recommendations would receive a follow-up colonoscopy after 10 years using ESGE guidance and after 5 years using US-MSTF guidance. Conclusion Despite the different criteria used to determine surveillance after serrated polyp resection, most individuals are recommended identical colonoscopy surveillance intervals whether following the ESGE or US-MSTF guidelines. This suggests that surveillance recommendations do not need to consider the serrated polyp subtype.