International Journal of Radiation Oncology * Biology * Physics
Volume 76, Issue 3 , Pages 719-727 , 1 March 2010

Translating Response During Therapy into Ultimate Treatment Outcome: A Personalized 4-Dimensional MRI Tumor Volumetric Regression Approach in Cervical Cancer

  • Nina A. Mayr, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to: Dr. Nina A. Mayr, Department of Radiation Medicine, Ohio State University, Arthur James Cancer Hospital, 300 W. 10th Avenue, Room 088B, Columbus, OH 43210. Tel: (614) 293-3244; Fax: (614) 293-4044
    • ,
  • Jian Z. Wang, Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
    • ,
  • Simon S. Lo, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
    • ,
  • Dongqing Zhang, Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
    • ,
  • John C. Grecula, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
    • ,
  • Lanchun Lu, Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
    • ,
  • Joseph F. Montebello, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
    • ,
  • Jeffrey M. Fowler, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
    • ,
  • William T.C. Yuh, M.D., M.S.E.E.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH

Received 10 November 2008 ,Revised 11 January 2009 ,Accepted 9 February 2009.

References 

  1. Eifel PJ, Winter K, Morris M, et al. Pelvic irradiation with concurrent chemotherapy versus pelvic and para-aortic irradiation for high-risk cervical cancer: An update of radiation therapy oncology group trial (RTOG) 90-01. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:872–880
  2. Kastritis E, Bamias A, Efstathiou E, et al. The outcome of advanced or recurrent non-squamous carcinoma of the uterine cervix after platinum-based combination chemotherapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;99:376–382
  3. vanNagell JR Jr., Roddick JW Jr., DM L. The staging of cervical cancer: Inevitable discrepancies between clinical staging and pathologic findings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1971;110:973–978.
  4. Mitchell D, Snyder B, Coakley F, et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: Tumor delineation by magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and clinical examination, verified by pathologic results. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:5687–5694
  5. Mayr NA, Yuh WTC, Zheng J, et al. Tumor size evaluated by pelvic examination compared with 3-D MR quantitative analysis in the prediction of outcome for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;39:395–404
  6. Hricak HLC, Sandles LG, et al. Invasive cervical carcinoma: Comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings. Radiology. 1988;166:623–631
  7. Subak L, Hricak H, Powell CB, et al. Cervical carcinoma: Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;86:43–50
  8. Kim SH, Choi BI, Lee HP, et al. Uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of CT and MR findings. Radiology. 1990;175:45–51
  9. Burghardt E, Hoffman HM, Ebner F, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in cervical cancer: A basis for objective classification. Gynecol Oncol. 1989;33:61–67
  10. Hricak H. Cancer of the uterus: The value of MRI pre-and post-irradiation. Int J Rad Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21:1089–1094
  11. Mayr NA, Magnotta VA, Ehrhardt JC, et al. Usefulness of tumor volumetry by magnetic resonance imaging in assessing response to radiation therapy in carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;35:915–924
  12. Hatano K, Sekiya Y, Araki H, et al. Evaluation of the therapeutic effect of radiotherapy on cervical cancer using magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;45:693–644
  13. Ohara K, Oki A, Tanaka YO, et al. Early determination of uterine cervical squamous cell carcinoma radioresponse identifies high- and low-response tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64:1179–1182
  14. Annual report of treatment in gynecologic cancer. Int Fed Gynecol Obstet. 1988;20:40
  15. Eifel PJ, Morris M, Wharton JT, Oswald MJ. The influence of tumor size and morphology on the outcome of patients with FIGO stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1994;29:9–16
  16. Kovalic JJ, Perez CA, Grigsby PW, Lockett MA. The effect of volume of disease in patients with carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21:905–910
  17. Hricak H, Powell CB, Yu KK, et al. Invasive cervical carcinoma: Role of MR imaging in pretreatment work-up—cost-minimization and diagnosis efficacy. Radiology. 1996;198:403–409
  18. Kim H, Kim W, Lee M, Song E, Loh JJ. Tumor volume and uterine body invasion assessed by MRI for prediction of outcome in cervical carcinoma treated with concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2007;37:858–866
  19. Kodaira T, Fuwa N, Kamata M, et al. Clinical assessment by MRI for patients with Stage II cervical carcinoma treated by radiation alone in multicenter analysis: Are all patients with Stage II disease suitable candidates for chemotherapy?. Int J Rad Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;52:627–636
  20. Wagenaar HCTJ, Postema S, Anastasopoulou A, et al. Tumor diameter and volume assessed by magnetic resonance imaging in the prediction of outcome for invasive cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;82:474–482
  21. Ebner F, Kressel HY, Mintz MC, et al. Tumor recurrence versus fibrosis in the female pelvis: Differentiation with MR imaging at 1.5 T. Radiology. 1988;166:333–340
  22. Mayr NA, Yuh WTC, Taoka T, et al. Serial therapy-induced changes in tumor shape in cervical cancer and their impact on assessing tumor volume and treatment response. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187:65–72
  23. Hricak H, Quivey J, Campos Z, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix: Predictive value of clinical and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging assessment of prognostic factors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993;27:791–801
  24. Vincens E, Balleyguier C, Rey A, et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in predicting residual disease in patients treated for stage IB2/II cervical carcinoma with chemoradiation therapy. Cancer. 2008;113:2158–2165
  25. Pötter R, Dimopoulos J, Georg P, et al. Clinical impact of MRI assisted dose volume adaptation and dose escalation in brachytherapy of locally advanced cervix cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2007;83:148–155
  26. Schwarz JK, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. Association of posttherapy positron emission tomography with tumor response and survival in cervical carcinoma. JAMA. 2007;298:2289–2295

 This research was supported by the National Institutes of Health (Contract Grant No. RO1 CA 71906).

 Conflict of interest: none.

PII: S0360-3016(09)00328-9

doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.02.036

International Journal of Radiation Oncology * Biology * Physics
Volume 76, Issue 3 , Pages 719-727 , 1 March 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution