Publications

PURPOSE: To study the experiences of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) contributing to treatment discrepancy in the United States.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data from National Cancer Institute (NCI), Medicare (2002-2015) beneficiaries with HCC who completed a Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey were included. Six CAHPS items (3 global scores: global care rating [GCR], primary doctor rating [PDR], and specialist rating [SR]; 3 composite scores: getting needed care [GNC], getting care quickly [GCQ], and doctor communication [DC]) assessed patient experience. Covariates assessed between treated and nontreated groups included patient, disease, hospital, and CAHPS items.

RESULTS: Among 548 patients with HCC, 211 (39%) received treatment and 337 (61%) did not receive treatment. Forty-two percent (GCR), 29% (PDR), 30% (SR), 36% (GNC), 78% (GCQ), and 35% (DC) of patients reported less-than-excellent experiences on the respective CAHPS items. Chronic liver disease (CLD) was present in 52% and liver decompensation (LD) in 60%. A minority of the hospitals were NCI-designated cancer centers (47%), transplant centers (27%), and referral centers (9%). On univariable analysis, patients with at least a high school degree (odds ratio [OR], 1.9), admittance to a ≥400-bed hospital (OR, 2.7), CLD (OR, 3.0), or LD (OR, 1.7) were more likely to receive treatment, whereas older patients (≥75 years) (OR, 0.5) were less likely to receive treatment. On multivariable, patients with CLD (OR, 6.8) and an excellent experience in GNC with a specialist (OR, 10.6) were more likely to receive treatment.

CONCLUSIONS: HCC treatment discrepancy may be associated with patient-related factors, such as lack of specialist care (GNC), and disease-related factors, such as absence of underlying CLD.

OBJECTIVE: To assess success and safety of CT-guided procedures with narrow window access for biopsy.

METHODS: Three hundred ninety-six consecutive patients undergoing abdominal or pelvic CT-guided biopsy or fiducial placement between 01/2015 and 12/2018 were included (183 women, mean age 63 ± 14 years). Procedures were classified into "wide window" (width of the needle path between structures > 15 mm) and "narrow window" (≤ 15 mm) based on intraprocedural images. Clinical information, complications, technical and clinical success, and outcomes were collected. The blunt needle approach is preferred by our interventional radiology team for narrow window access.

RESULTS: There were 323 (81.5%) wide window procedures and 73 (18.5%) narrow window procedures with blunt needle approach. The median depth for the narrow window group was greater (97 mm, interquartile range (IQR) 82-113 mm) compared to the wide window group (84 mm, IQR 60-106 mm); p = 0.0017. Technical success was reached in 100% (73/73) of the narrow window and 99.7% (322/323) of the wide window procedures. There was no difference in clinical success rate between the two groups (narrow: 86.4%, 57/66; wide: 89.5%, 265/296; p = 0.46). There was no difference in immediate complication rate (narrow: 1.3%, 1/73; wide: 1.2%, 4/323; p = 0.73) or delayed complication rate (narrow: 1.3%, 1/73; wide: 0.6%, 1/323; p = 0.50).

CONCLUSION: Narrow window (< 15 mm) access biopsy and fiducial placement with blunt needle approach under CT guidance is safe and successful.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: CT-guided biopsy and fiducial placement can be performed through narrow window access of less than 15 mm utilizing the blunt-tip technique.

KEY POINTS: • A narrow window for CT-guided abdominal and pelvic biopsies and fiducial placements was considered when width of the needle path between vital structures was ≤ 15 mm. • Seventy-three biopsies and fiducial placements performed through a narrow window with blunt needle approach had a similar rate of technical and clinical success and complications compared to 323 procedures performed through a wide window approach, with traditional approach (> 15 mm). • This study confirmed the safety of the CT-guided percutaneous procedures through < 15 mm window with blunt-tip technique.

INTRODUCTION: Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is the standard pretreatment staging in patients with rectal cancer. Accurate tumor staging is paramount to determining the appropriate treatment course for patients diagnosed with rectal cancer. The current study aims to re-evaluate the accuracy of pre-operative MRI in staging of both early and locally advanced rectal cancer following completion of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) compared to the pathologic stage.

METHODS: A retrospective review of patients treated for rectal cancer between 2015 and 2020 at a single academic institution. All patients underwent rectal cancer protocol MRIs before surgical resection. Analysis was carried out in two groups: early rectal cancer: T1/2 N0 tumors with upfront surgical resection (N = 40); and locally advanced disease: T3 or greater or N+ disease receiving NAT, with restaging MRI following NAT (n = 63).

RESULTS: 103 patients were included in analysis. MRI accuracy in early tumors was 35% ICC = 0.52 (95% CI 0.25-0.71) T stage and 66% ICC = 0 (95% CI -0.24, 0.29) for 29 patients with nodal data for N stage. There was 28% understaging of T2 tumors and 34% understaging of N0 stage by MRI. Post NAT MRI had 44% accuracy ICC = 0.57 (95% CI -0.15-0.20) T stage and 60% accuracy ICC = 0.32 (95% CI 0.08-0.52) N stage. Tumor invasion was overstaged on MRI: 40% T2, 29% T3, 90% T4. Nodal inaccuracy was due to overstaging, 61% N1, 90% N2.

CONCLUSIONS: In locally advanced rectal cancer MRI overstaged tumors, this could be due to the continued effect of NAT from MRI to resection. This overstaging is of little clinical significance as it doesn't alter the treatment plan, except in cases of complete clinical response. In early rectal cancer, MRI had limited accuracy compared to pathology, understaging a quarter of patients who would benefit from NAT before surgery. Other adjunct imaging modalities should be considered to improve accuracy in staging early rectal cancer and consideration of complete response and enrollment in watch and wait protocols.

In April 2023, the first American Roentgen Ray Society (ARRS) Wellness Summit was held in Honolulu, Hawaii. The Summit was a communal call to action bringing together professionals from the field of radiology to critically review our current state of wellness and reimagine the role of radiology and radiologists to further wellbeing. The in-person and virtual Summit was available free-of-cost to all meeting registrants and included 12 sessions with 44 invited moderators and panelists. The Summit aimed to move beyond simply rehashing the repeated issues and offering theoretical solutions, and instead focus on intentional practice evolution, identifying implementable strategies so that we as a field can start to walk our wellness talk. Here, we first summarize the thematic discussions from the 2023 ARRS Wellness Summit, and second, share several strategic action items that emerged.

Lung cancer continues to be the most common cause of cancer-related death worldwide. In the past decade, with the implementation of lung cancer screening programs and advances in surgical and nonsurgical therapies, the survival of patients with lung cancer has increased, as has the number of imaging studies that these patients undergo. However, most patients with lung cancer do not undergo surgical re-section, because they have comorbid disease or lung cancer in an advanced stage at diagnosis. Nonsurgical therapies have continued to evolve with a growing range of systemic and targeted therapies, and there has been an associated evolution in the imaging findings encountered at follow-up examinations after such therapies (e.g., with respect to posttreatment changes, treatment complications, and recurrent tumor). This AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review describes the current status of nonsurgical therapies for lung cancer and their expected and unexpected imaging manifestations. The goal is to provide guidance to radiologists regarding imaging assessment after such therapies, focusing mainly on non-small cell lung cancer. Covered therapies include systemic therapy (conventional chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy), radiotherapy, and thermal ablation.

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy, completeness, and readability of patient educational material produced by a machine learning model and compare the output to that provided by a societal website.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Content from the Society of Interventional Radiology Patient Center website was retrieved, categorized, and organized into discrete questions. These questions were entered into the ChatGPT platform, and the output was analyzed for word and sentence counts, readability using multiple validated scales, factual correctness, and suitability for patient education using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Printable Materials (PEMAT-P) instrument.

RESULTS: A total of 21,154 words were analyzed, including 7,917 words from the website and 13,377 words representing the total output of the ChatGPT platform across 22 text passages. Compared to the societal website, output from the ChatGPT platform was longer and more difficult to read on 4 of 5 readability scales. The ChatGPT output was incorrect for 12 (11.5%) of 104 questions. When reviewed using the PEMAT-P tool, the ChatGPT content scored lower than the website material. Content from both the website and ChatGPT were significantly above the recommended fifth or sixth grade level for patient education, with a mean Flesch-Kincaid grade level of 11.1 (±1.3) for the website and 11.9 (±1.6) for the ChatGPT content.

CONCLUSIONS: The ChatGPT platform may produce incomplete or inaccurate patient educational content, and providers should be familiar with the limitations of the system in its current form. Opportunities may exist to fine-tune existing large language models, which could be optimized for the delivery of patient educational content.

PURPOSE: To investigate the role of microRNA-21 (miR21) in radiofrequency (RF) ablation-induced tumor growth and whether miR21 inhibition suppresses tumorigenesis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Standardized liver RF ablation was applied to 35 C57/BL6 mice. miR21 and target proteins pSTAT3, PDCD4, and PTEN were assayed 3 hours, 24 hours, and 3 days after ablation. Next, 53 Balb/c and 44 C57BL/6 mice received Antago-miR21 or scrambled Antago-nc control, followed by intrasplenic injection of 10,000 CT26 or MC38 colorectal tumor cells, respectively. Hepatic RF ablation or sham ablation was performed 24 hours later. Metastases were quantified and tumor microvascular density (MVD) and cellular proliferation were assessed at 14 or 21 days after the procedures, respectively.

RESULTS: RF ablation significantly increased miR21 levels in plasma and hepatic tissue at 3 and 24 hours as well as target proteins at 3 days after ablation (P < .05, all comparisons). RF ablation nearly doubled tumor growth (CT26, 2.0 SD ± 1.0 fold change [fc]; MC38, 1.9 SD ± 0.9 fc) and increased MVD (CT26, 1.9 SD ± 1.0 fc; MC38, 1.5 ± 0.5 fc) and cellular proliferation (CT26, 1.7 SD ± 0.7 fc; MC38, 1.4 SD ± 0.5 fc) compared with sham ablation (P < .05, all comparisons). RF ablation-induced tumor growth was suppressed when Antago-miR21 was administered (CT26, 1.0 SD ± 0.7 fc; MC38, 0.9 SD ± 0.4 fc) (P < .01, both comparisons). Likewise, Antago-miR21 decreased MVD (CT26, 1.0 SD ± 0.3 fc; MC38, 1.0 SD ± 0.2 fc) and cellular proliferation (CT26, 0.9 SD ± 0.3 fc; MC38, 0.8 SD ± 0.3 fc) compared with baseline (P < .05, all comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS: RF ablation upregulates protumorigenic miR21, which subsequently influences downstream tumor-promoting protein pathways. This effect can potentially be suppressed by specific inhibition of miR21, rendering this microRNA a pivotal and targetable driver of tumorigenesis after hepatic thermal ablation.

Emerging evidence regarding the effectiveness of locoregional therapies (LRTs) for breast cancer has prompted investigation of the potential role of interventional radiology (IR) in the care continuum of patients with breast cancer. The Society of Interventional Radiology Foundation invited 7 key opinion leaders to develop research priorities to delineate the role of LRTs in both primary and metastatic breast cancer. The objectives of the research consensus panel were to identify knowledge gaps and opportunities pertaining to the treatment of primary and metastatic breast cancer, establish priorities for future breast cancer LRT clinical trials, and highlight lead technologies that will improve breast cancer outcomes either alone or in combination with other therapies. Potential research focus areas were proposed by individual panel members and ranked by all participants according to each focus area's overall impact. The results of this research consensus panel present the current priorities for the IR research community related to the treatment of breast cancer to investigate the clinical impact of minimally invasive therapies in the current breast cancer treatment paradigm.

Convolutional neural networks (CNN) have demonstrated good accuracy and speed in spatially registering high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) structural magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI) images. However, some functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) images, e.g., those acquired from arterial spin labeling (ASL) perfusion fMRI, are of intrinsically low SNR and therefore the quality of registering ASL images using CNN is not clear. In this work, we aimed to explore the feasibility of a CNN-based affine registration network (ARN) for registration of low-SNR three-dimensional ASL perfusion image time series and compare its performance with that from the state-of-the-art statistical parametric mapping (SPM) algorithm. The six affine parameters were learned from the ARN using both simulated motion and real acquisitions from ASL perfusion fMRI data and the registered images were generated by applying the transformation derived from the affine parameters. The speed and registration accuracy were compared between ARN and SPM. Several independent datasets, including meditation study (10 subjects × 2), bipolar disorder study (26 controls, 19 bipolar disorder subjects), and aging study (27 young subjects, 33 older subjects), were used to validate the generality of the trained ARN model. The ARN method achieves superior image affine registration accuracy (total translation/total rotation errors of ARN vs. SPM: 1.17 mm/1.23° vs. 6.09 mm/12.90° for simulated images and reduced MSE/L1/DSSIM/Total errors of 18.07% / 19.02% / 0.04% / 29.59% for real ASL test images) and 4.4 times (ARN vs. SPM: 0.50 s vs. 2.21 s) faster speed compared to SPM. The trained ARN can be generalized to align ASL perfusion image time series acquired with different scanners, and from different image resolutions, and from healthy or diseased populations. The results demonstrated that our ARN markedly outperforms the iteration-based SPM both for simulated motion and real acquisitions in terms of registration accuracy, speed, and generalization.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary orthopaedic oncology conferences are important in developing the treatment plan for patients with suspected orthopaedic bone and soft tissue tumors, involving physicians from several services. Past studies have shown the clinical value of these conferences; however, the impact of radiology input on the management plan and time cost for radiology to staff these conferences has not been fully studied.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does radiology input at multidisciplinary conference help guide clinical management and improve clinician confidence? (2) What is the time cost of radiology input for a multidisciplinary conference?

METHODS: This prospective study was conducted from October 2020 to March 2022 at a tertiary academic center with a sarcoma center. A single data questionnaire for each patient was sent to one of three treating orthopaedic oncologists with 41, 19, and 5 years of experience after radiology discussion at a weekly multidisciplinary conference. A data questionnaire was completed by the treating orthopaedic oncologist for 48% (322 of 672) of patients, which refers to the proportion of those three oncologists' patients for which survey data were captured. A musculoskeletal radiology fellow and musculoskeletal fellowship-trained radiology attending physician provided radiology input at each multidisciplinary conference. The clinical plan (leave alone, follow-up imaging, follow-up clinically, recommend different imaging test, core needle biopsy, surgical excision or biopsy or fixation, or other) and change in clinical confidence before and after radiology input were documented. A second weekly data questionnaire was sent to the radiology fellow to estimate the time cost of radiology input for the multidisciplinary conference.

RESULTS: In 29% (93 of 322) of patients, there was a change in the clinical plan after radiology input. Biopsy was canceled in 30% (24 of 80) of patients for whom biopsy was initially planned, and surgical excision was canceled in 24% (17 of 72) of patients in whom surgical excision was initially planned. In 21% (68 of 322) of patients, there were unreported imaging findings that affected clinical management; 13% (43 of 322) of patients had a missed finding, and 8% (25 of 322) of patients had imaging findings that were interpreted incorrectly. For confidence in the final treatment plan, 78% (251 of 322) of patients had an increase in clinical confidence by their treating orthopaedic oncologist after the multidisciplinary conference. Radiology fellows and attendings spent a mean of 4.2 and 1.5 hours, respectively, reviewing and presenting at a multidisciplinary conference each week. The annual combined prorated time cost for the radiology attending and fellow was estimated at USD 24,310 based on national median salary data for attendings and internal salary data for fellows.

CONCLUSION: In a study taken at one tertiary-care oncology program, input from radiology attendings and fellows in the setting of a multidisciplinary conference helped to guide the final treatment plan, reduce procedures, and improve clinician confidence in the final treatment plan, at an annual time cost of USD 24,310.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Multidisciplinary orthopaedic oncology conferences can lead to changes in management plans, and the time cost to the radiologists should be budgeted for by the radiology department or parent institution.