Comparative study of imaging at 3.0 T versus 1.5 T of the knee

The objectives of the study were to compare MR imaging at 1.5 and 3.0 T in the same patients concerning image quality and visualization of cartilage pathology and to assess diagnostic performance using arthroscopy as a standard of reference. Twenty-six patients were identified retrospectively as having comparative 1.5 and 3.0 T MR studies of the knee within an average of 102 days. Standard protocols included T1-weighted and fat-saturated intermediate-weighted fast spin-echo sequences in three planes; sequence parameters had been adjusted to account for differences in relaxation at 3.0 T. Arthroscopy was performed in 19 patients. Four radiologists reviewed each study independently, scored image quality, and analyzed pathological findings. Sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies in diagnosing cartilage lesions were calculated in the 19 patients with arthroscopy, and differences between 1.5 and 3.0 T exams were compared using paired Student’s t tests with a significance threshold of p < 0.05. Each radiologist scored the 3.0 T studies higher than those obtained at 1.5 T in visualizing anatomical structures and abnormalities (p < 0.05). Using arthroscopy as a standard of reference, diagnosis of cartilage abnormalities was improved at 3.0 T with higher sensitivity (75.7% versus 70.6%), accuracy (88.2% versus 86.4%), and correct grading of cartilage lesions (51.3% versus 42.9%). Diagnostic confidence scores were higher at 3.0 than 1.5 T (p < 0.05) and signal-to-noise ratio at 3.0 T was approximately twofold higher than at 1.5 T. MRI at 3.0 T improved visualization of anatomical structures and improved diagnostic confidence compared to 1.5 T. This resulted in significantly better sensitivity and grading of cartilage lesions at the knee

Assessment of cartilage-dedicated sequences at ultra-high-field MRI: comparison of imaging performance and diagnostic confidence between 3.0 and 7.0 T with respect to osteoarthritis-induced changes at the knee joint

The objectives of the study were to optimize three cartilage-dedicated sequences for in vivo knee imaging at 7.0 T ultra-high-field (UHF) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to compare imaging performance and diagnostic confidence concerning osteoarthritis (OA)-induced changes at 7.0 and 3.0 T MRI. Optimized MRI sequences for cartilage imaging at 3.0 T were tailored for 7.0 T: an intermediate-weighted fast spin-echo (IM-w FSE), a fast imaging employing steady-state acquisition (FIESTA) and a T1-weighted 3D high-spatial-resolution volumetric fat-suppressed spoiled gradient-echo (SPGR) sequence. Three healthy subjects and seven patients with mild OA were examined. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), diagnostic confidence in assessing cartilage abnormalities, and image quality were determined. Abnormalities were assessed with the whole organ magnetic resonance imaging score (WORMS). Focal cartilage lesions and bone marrow edema pattern (BMEP) were also quantified. At 7.0 T, SNR was increased (p < 0.05) for all sequences. For the IM-w FSE sequence, limitations with the specific absorption rate (SAR) required modifications of the scan parameters yielding an incomplete coverage of the knee joint, extensive artifacts, and a less effective fat saturation. CNR and image quality were increased (p < 0.05) for SPGR and FIESTA and decreased for IM-w FSE. Diagnostic confidence for cartilage lesions was highest (p < 0.05) for FIESTA at 7.0 T. Evaluation of BMEP was decreased (p < 0.05) at 7.0 T due to limited performance of IM-w FSE. Gradient echo-based pulse sequences like SPGR and FIESTA are well suited for imaging at UHF which may improve early detection of cartilage lesions. However, UHF IM-w FSE sequences are less feasible for clinical use

Defining patient outcomes in stage IV colorectal cancer: a prospective study with baseline stratification according to disease resectability status

BACKGROUND: Stage IV colorectal cancer encompasses a broad patient population in which both curative and palliative management strategies may be used. In a phase II study primarily designed to assess the efficacy of capecitabine and oxaliplatin, we were able to prospectively examine the outcomes of patients with stage IV colorectal cancer according to the baseline resectability status. METHODS: At enrolment, patients were stratified into three subgroups according to the resectability of liver disease and treatment intent: palliative chemotherapy (subgroup A), conversion therapy (subgroup B) or neoadjuvant therapy (subgroup C). All patients received chemotherapy with capecitabine 2000 mg m(-2) on days 1-14 and oxaliplatin 130 mg m(-2) on day 1 repeated every 3 weeks. Imaging was repeated every four cycles where feasible liver resection was undertaken after four or eight cycles of chemotherapy. RESULTS: Of 128 enrolled patients, 74, 22 and 32 were stratified into subgroups A, B and C, respectively. Attempt at curative liver resection was undertaken in 10 (45%) patients in subgroup B and 19 (59%) in subgroup C. The median overall survival was 14.6, 24.5 and 52.9 months in subgroups A, B and C, respectively. For patients in subgroups B and C who underwent an attempt at curative resection, 3-year progression-free survival was 10% in subgroup B and 37% for subgroup C. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study shows the wide variation in outcome according to baseline resectability status and highlights the potential clinical value of a modified staging system to distinguish between these patient subgroups. British Journal of Cancer (2010) 102, 255-261. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605508 www.bjcancer.com (C) 2010 Cancer Research U

Histopathologic evaluation of liver metastases from colorectal cancer in patients treated with FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab.

BACKGROUND: The FOLFOXIRI regimen produces a high rate of radiological and histopathological responses. Bevacizumab added to chemotherapy showed an improvement in pathological response and necrosis of colorectal liver metastases (CLMs). FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab produced promising early clinical results and is under investigation in several randomised trials, although no data are currently available on its effects on response of CLMs and on liver toxicities. METHODS: Starting from 499 patients enrolled in first-line phase II/III trials, we selected on the basis of tissue sample availability 18 patients treated with FOLFOXIRI/XELOXIRI and 24 patients treated with FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab who underwent secondary resection of CLMs. The 28 untreated patients who underwent primary resection of CLMs were included as control group. Responses of CLMs and chemotherapy-induced toxicities were assessed. RESULTS: Among the patients, 63% of those treated with FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab, as compared with 28% of those treated with only FOLFOXIRI/XELOXIRI, showed a histopathological response (P=0.033). In the two groups, 52% and 12.5%, respectively, showed necrosis ⩾50% (P=0.017). The incidence of liver toxicities was not significantly increased in patients treated with FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab. CONCLUSION: The addition of bevacizumab to FOLFOXIRI produces high rates of pathologic responses and necrosis of CLM without increasing liver toxicity