A comparison between MRI and CT in the assessment of primary tumour volume in mesothelioma

Tsim, Selina; Cowell, Gordon W.; Kidd, Andrew; Woodward, Rosemary; Alexander, Laura E. Crotty; Kelly, Caroline; Foster, John E.; Blyth, Kevin G.

doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2020.09.025

Cited by 14 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The MRI technique used to measure this is indirect but robust and outperforms both clinical stage and computed tomography volumetry as a prognostic indicator in MPM. 18 In conclusion, in this study, which, to our knowledge, is the largest prospective MPM biomarker study to date, the SOMAscan proteomic assay proved useful as a potential future screening test for MPM in asbestosexposed persons. Neither fibulin-3 nor SOMAscan proved useful in the diagnosis of MPM.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Serum Proteomics and Plasma Fibulin-3 in Differentiation of Mesothelioma From Asbestos-Exposed Controls and Patients With Other Pleural Diseases

Tsim

Alexander

Kelly

et al. 2021

Journal of Thoracic Oncology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…MRI acquisition and volumetric methods have previously been published. 18,19 Primary tumor volume was recorded in cm 3 .…”

Section: Test Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Serum Proteomics and Plasma Fibulin-3 in Differentiation of Mesothelioma From Asbestos-Exposed Controls and Patients With Other Pleural Diseases

Tsim

Alexander

Kelly

et al. 2021

Journal of Thoracic Oncology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Imaging Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) offers higher soft tissue contrast than CT, resulting in an increased sensitivity for chest wall and diaphragm invasion, higher contrast with adjacent effusion and higher inter-observer agreement [64]. The contrast enhanced perfusion augments sensitivity in detection of pleural malignancy, even where pleural thickening is minimal [64]. In addition to differentiating malignant from benign pleural disease, diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI-MRI) has distinguished between epithelioid and sarcomatoid MPM with a sensitivity of 60% and a specificity of 94% [1].…”

Section: Imaging Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ancillary Diagnostic Investigations in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Dipper

Maskell

Bibby

2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For a number of patients presenting with an undiagnosed pleural effusion, frailty, medical co-morbidity or personal choice may preclude the use of pleural biopsy, the gold standard investigation for diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). In this review article, we outline the most recent evidence on ancillary diagnostic tests which may be used to support a diagnosis of MPM where histological samples cannot be obtained or where results are non-diagnostic. Immunocytochemical markers, molecular techniques, diagnostic biomarkers and imaging techniques are discussed. No adjunctive test has a sensitivity and specificity profile to support use in isolation; however, correlation of pleural fluid cytology with relevant radiology and supplementary biomarkers can enable an MDT-consensus clinico-radiological-cytological diagnosis to be made where further invasive tests are not possible or not appropriate. Diagnostic challenges surrounding non-epithelioid MPM are recognised, and there is a critical need for reliable and non-invasive investigative tools in this population.

show abstract

“…However, CT still has some limits about loco-regional staging and lymph-node metastases evaluation and it is affected by a considerable interobserver variability [8,9]. In particular, CT has a low soft tissue contrast, and this may determine an inaccurate local extent or an imprecise pleural and adjacent involvement; moreover, MPM has an irregular, rind-like, and diffuse pattern of growth, which makes most measurements in single or bidimensional lesions unreliable and not always replicable [11][12][13]. Given the three-dimensional shape of MPM, a volumetric approach seems to be the logical evolution of uni-dimensional criteria.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New Updates of the Imaging Role in Diagnosis, Staging, and Response Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Romei¹,

Fanni

Volpi

et al. 2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a rare neoplasm with poor prognosis. CT is the first imaging technique used for diagnosis, staging, and assessment of therapy response. Although, CT has intrinsic limitations due to low soft tissue contrast and the current staging system as well as criteria for evaluating response, it does not consider the complex growth pattern of this tumor. Computer-based methods have proven their potentiality in diagnosis, staging, prognosis, and assessment of therapy response; moreover, computer-based methods can make feasible tasks like segmentation that would otherwise be impracticable. MRI, thanks to its high soft tissue contrast evaluation of contrast enhancement and through diffusion-weighted-images, could replace CT in many clinical settings.

show abstract

A comparison between MRI and CT in the assessment of primary tumour volume in mesothelioma

Cited by 14 publications

References 32 publications

Serum Proteomics and Plasma Fibulin-3 in Differentiation of Mesothelioma From Asbestos-Exposed Controls and Patients With Other Pleural Diseases

Serum Proteomics and Plasma Fibulin-3 in Differentiation of Mesothelioma From Asbestos-Exposed Controls and Patients With Other Pleural Diseases

Ancillary Diagnostic Investigations in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

New Updates of the Imaging Role in Diagnosis, Staging, and Response Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About