Diagnostic accuracy of non-contrast abdominopelvic computed tomography scans in follow-up of breast cancer patients
To evaluate the effectiveness of follow-up with non-enhanced CT (NECT) in patients with breast cancer. The present retrospective study included 1396 patients with breast cancer. Group A included patients with no metastasis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of NECT in detecting newly developed m...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of radiology 2021-02, Vol.94 (1118), p.20201087-20201087 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 20201087 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1118 |
| container_start_page | 20201087 |
| container_title | British journal of radiology |
| container_volume | 94 |
| creator | Nam, Sang Yu Ahn, Su Joa Jang, Young Rock Chun, Yong Soon Park, Heung Kyu Choi, Seung Joon Choi, Hye Young Kim, Jeong Ho |
| description | To evaluate the effectiveness of follow-up with non-enhanced CT (NECT) in patients with breast cancer.
The present retrospective study included 1396 patients with breast cancer. Group A included patients with no metastasis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of NECT in detecting newly developed metastasis. Group B included patients with known hepatic metastasis to evaluate the accuracy of NECT for the assessment of hepatic metastasis.
Group A included 895 patients (mean age 52.8 years). Among them, 145 patients had 160 metastases. The per-patient sensitivities for diagnosing newly developed metastasis were 68.3 and 53.8% according to the two reviewers, while the per-lesion sensitivities were 89.4 and 85.0%. Sensitivities for bone metastasis were 98.9 and 95.9%, while sensitivities for hepatic metastasis were 73.7 and 68.4%. In group B, the accuracy of hepatic metastasis response evaluation according to the RECIST criteria was 70.8% for reviewer 1 and 63.8% for reviewer 2.
NECT showed inadequate diagnostic performance in detecting newly developed metastasis and in evaluating the response of hepatic metastasis. However, NECT can be utilized as a follow-up modality in patients with decreased renal function or hypersensitivity to iodinated contrast media.
The risk of side effects of contrast media should be considered as important when NECT can be utilized as a follow-up modality in decreased renal function patients. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1259/bjr.20201087 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7934306</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2480273781</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-b840468ad135ce04a368220b6f0d700d14b710b73d110f4ad61bfff87964de7b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkUtr3TAQhUVJaW6T7rouWmYRpyNL15I3gZCkaSHQTQvZCT1vFGzJleSU--9rkwfpahjmmzOPg9BnAmek3fZf9UM-a6EFAoK_QxvCmWiEgLsDtAEA3pBWbA_Rx1Ie1nTbwwd0SCmFrif9BpWroHYxlRoMVsbMWZk9Th7HFBuTYs2qVKy0TWOIaXLD48KZNE5zdRbXNKZdVtP9HhejYsEhYp-GIf1t5mlV0dmt_UvNuIwnVYOLtRyj914NxX16jkfo97frX5ffm9ufNz8uL24bQwWrjRYMWCeUJXRrHDBFO9G2oDsPlgNYwjQnoDm1hIBnynZEe-8F7ztmHdf0CJ0_6U6zHp01bj1nkFMOo8p7mVSQ_1diuJe79Ch5T9nyoEXg5Fkgpz-zK1WOoRg3DCq6NBfZMgEtp1yQBT19Qk1OpWTnX8cQkKtPcvFJvvi04F_ervYKvxhD_wF9EZHj</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2480273781</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Diagnostic accuracy of non-contrast abdominopelvic computed tomography scans in follow-up of breast cancer patients</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Nam, Sang Yu ; Ahn, Su Joa ; Jang, Young Rock ; Chun, Yong Soon ; Park, Heung Kyu ; Choi, Seung Joon ; Choi, Hye Young ; Kim, Jeong Ho</creator><creatorcontrib>Nam, Sang Yu ; Ahn, Su Joa ; Jang, Young Rock ; Chun, Yong Soon ; Park, Heung Kyu ; Choi, Seung Joon ; Choi, Hye Young ; Kim, Jeong Ho</creatorcontrib><description>To evaluate the effectiveness of follow-up with non-enhanced CT (NECT) in patients with breast cancer.
The present retrospective study included 1396 patients with breast cancer. Group A included patients with no metastasis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of NECT in detecting newly developed metastasis. Group B included patients with known hepatic metastasis to evaluate the accuracy of NECT for the assessment of hepatic metastasis.
Group A included 895 patients (mean age 52.8 years). Among them, 145 patients had 160 metastases. The per-patient sensitivities for diagnosing newly developed metastasis were 68.3 and 53.8% according to the two reviewers, while the per-lesion sensitivities were 89.4 and 85.0%. Sensitivities for bone metastasis were 98.9 and 95.9%, while sensitivities for hepatic metastasis were 73.7 and 68.4%. In group B, the accuracy of hepatic metastasis response evaluation according to the RECIST criteria was 70.8% for reviewer 1 and 63.8% for reviewer 2.
NECT showed inadequate diagnostic performance in detecting newly developed metastasis and in evaluating the response of hepatic metastasis. However, NECT can be utilized as a follow-up modality in patients with decreased renal function or hypersensitivity to iodinated contrast media.
The risk of side effects of contrast media should be considered as important when NECT can be utilized as a follow-up modality in decreased renal function patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-1285</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1748-880X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20201087</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33306919</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: The British Institute of Radiology</publisher><subject>Abdominal Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Abdominal Neoplasms - secondary ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Bone Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Bone Neoplasms - secondary ; Breast Neoplasms - pathology ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Liver Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Liver Neoplasms - secondary ; Middle Aged ; Pelvic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Pelvic Neoplasms - secondary ; Reproducibility of Results ; Retrospective Studies ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>British journal of radiology, 2021-02, Vol.94 (1118), p.20201087-20201087</ispartof><rights>2020 The Authors. Published by the British Institute of Radiology 2020 The Authors</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-b840468ad135ce04a368220b6f0d700d14b710b73d110f4ad61bfff87964de7b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-b840468ad135ce04a368220b6f0d700d14b710b73d110f4ad61bfff87964de7b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33306919$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nam, Sang Yu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahn, Su Joa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jang, Young Rock</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chun, Yong Soon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Heung Kyu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Seung Joon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Hye Young</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Jeong Ho</creatorcontrib><title>Diagnostic accuracy of non-contrast abdominopelvic computed tomography scans in follow-up of breast cancer patients</title><title>British journal of radiology</title><addtitle>Br J Radiol</addtitle><description>To evaluate the effectiveness of follow-up with non-enhanced CT (NECT) in patients with breast cancer.
The present retrospective study included 1396 patients with breast cancer. Group A included patients with no metastasis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of NECT in detecting newly developed metastasis. Group B included patients with known hepatic metastasis to evaluate the accuracy of NECT for the assessment of hepatic metastasis.
Group A included 895 patients (mean age 52.8 years). Among them, 145 patients had 160 metastases. The per-patient sensitivities for diagnosing newly developed metastasis were 68.3 and 53.8% according to the two reviewers, while the per-lesion sensitivities were 89.4 and 85.0%. Sensitivities for bone metastasis were 98.9 and 95.9%, while sensitivities for hepatic metastasis were 73.7 and 68.4%. In group B, the accuracy of hepatic metastasis response evaluation according to the RECIST criteria was 70.8% for reviewer 1 and 63.8% for reviewer 2.
NECT showed inadequate diagnostic performance in detecting newly developed metastasis and in evaluating the response of hepatic metastasis. However, NECT can be utilized as a follow-up modality in patients with decreased renal function or hypersensitivity to iodinated contrast media.
The risk of side effects of contrast media should be considered as important when NECT can be utilized as a follow-up modality in decreased renal function patients.</description><subject>Abdominal Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Abdominal Neoplasms - secondary</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Bone Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Bone Neoplasms - secondary</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Liver Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Liver Neoplasms - secondary</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Pelvic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Pelvic Neoplasms - secondary</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0007-1285</issn><issn>1748-880X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkUtr3TAQhUVJaW6T7rouWmYRpyNL15I3gZCkaSHQTQvZCT1vFGzJleSU--9rkwfpahjmmzOPg9BnAmek3fZf9UM-a6EFAoK_QxvCmWiEgLsDtAEA3pBWbA_Rx1Ie1nTbwwd0SCmFrif9BpWroHYxlRoMVsbMWZk9Th7HFBuTYs2qVKy0TWOIaXLD48KZNE5zdRbXNKZdVtP9HhejYsEhYp-GIf1t5mlV0dmt_UvNuIwnVYOLtRyj914NxX16jkfo97frX5ffm9ufNz8uL24bQwWrjRYMWCeUJXRrHDBFO9G2oDsPlgNYwjQnoDm1hIBnynZEe-8F7ztmHdf0CJ0_6U6zHp01bj1nkFMOo8p7mVSQ_1diuJe79Ch5T9nyoEXg5Fkgpz-zK1WOoRg3DCq6NBfZMgEtp1yQBT19Qk1OpWTnX8cQkKtPcvFJvvi04F_ervYKvxhD_wF9EZHj</recordid><startdate>20210201</startdate><enddate>20210201</enddate><creator>Nam, Sang Yu</creator><creator>Ahn, Su Joa</creator><creator>Jang, Young Rock</creator><creator>Chun, Yong Soon</creator><creator>Park, Heung Kyu</creator><creator>Choi, Seung Joon</creator><creator>Choi, Hye Young</creator><creator>Kim, Jeong Ho</creator><general>The British Institute of Radiology</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210201</creationdate><title>Diagnostic accuracy of non-contrast abdominopelvic computed tomography scans in follow-up of breast cancer patients</title><author>Nam, Sang Yu ; Ahn, Su Joa ; Jang, Young Rock ; Chun, Yong Soon ; Park, Heung Kyu ; Choi, Seung Joon ; Choi, Hye Young ; Kim, Jeong Ho</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-b840468ad135ce04a368220b6f0d700d14b710b73d110f4ad61bfff87964de7b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Abdominal Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Abdominal Neoplasms - secondary</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Bone Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Bone Neoplasms - secondary</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Liver Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Liver Neoplasms - secondary</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Pelvic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Pelvic Neoplasms - secondary</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nam, Sang Yu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahn, Su Joa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jang, Young Rock</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chun, Yong Soon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Heung Kyu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Seung Joon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Hye Young</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Jeong Ho</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>British journal of radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nam, Sang Yu</au><au>Ahn, Su Joa</au><au>Jang, Young Rock</au><au>Chun, Yong Soon</au><au>Park, Heung Kyu</au><au>Choi, Seung Joon</au><au>Choi, Hye Young</au><au>Kim, Jeong Ho</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Diagnostic accuracy of non-contrast abdominopelvic computed tomography scans in follow-up of breast cancer patients</atitle><jtitle>British journal of radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Br J Radiol</addtitle><date>2021-02-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>94</volume><issue>1118</issue><spage>20201087</spage><epage>20201087</epage><pages>20201087-20201087</pages><issn>0007-1285</issn><eissn>1748-880X</eissn><abstract>To evaluate the effectiveness of follow-up with non-enhanced CT (NECT) in patients with breast cancer.
The present retrospective study included 1396 patients with breast cancer. Group A included patients with no metastasis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of NECT in detecting newly developed metastasis. Group B included patients with known hepatic metastasis to evaluate the accuracy of NECT for the assessment of hepatic metastasis.
Group A included 895 patients (mean age 52.8 years). Among them, 145 patients had 160 metastases. The per-patient sensitivities for diagnosing newly developed metastasis were 68.3 and 53.8% according to the two reviewers, while the per-lesion sensitivities were 89.4 and 85.0%. Sensitivities for bone metastasis were 98.9 and 95.9%, while sensitivities for hepatic metastasis were 73.7 and 68.4%. In group B, the accuracy of hepatic metastasis response evaluation according to the RECIST criteria was 70.8% for reviewer 1 and 63.8% for reviewer 2.
NECT showed inadequate diagnostic performance in detecting newly developed metastasis and in evaluating the response of hepatic metastasis. However, NECT can be utilized as a follow-up modality in patients with decreased renal function or hypersensitivity to iodinated contrast media.
The risk of side effects of contrast media should be considered as important when NECT can be utilized as a follow-up modality in decreased renal function patients.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>The British Institute of Radiology</pub><pmid>33306919</pmid><doi>10.1259/bjr.20201087</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0007-1285 |
| ispartof | British journal of radiology, 2021-02, Vol.94 (1118), p.20201087-20201087 |
| issn | 0007-1285 1748-880X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7934306 |
| source | Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
| subjects | Abdominal Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Abdominal Neoplasms - secondary Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Bone Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Bone Neoplasms - secondary Breast Neoplasms - pathology Female Follow-Up Studies Humans Liver Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Liver Neoplasms - secondary Middle Aged Pelvic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Pelvic Neoplasms - secondary Reproducibility of Results Retrospective Studies Sensitivity and Specificity Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods Young Adult |
| title | Diagnostic accuracy of non-contrast abdominopelvic computed tomography scans in follow-up of breast cancer patients |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T00%3A53%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Diagnostic%20accuracy%20of%20non-contrast%20abdominopelvic%20computed%20tomography%20scans%20in%20follow-up%20of%20breast%20cancer%20patients&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20radiology&rft.au=Nam,%20Sang%20Yu&rft.date=2021-02-01&rft.volume=94&rft.issue=1118&rft.spage=20201087&rft.epage=20201087&rft.pages=20201087-20201087&rft.issn=0007-1285&rft.eissn=1748-880X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1259/bjr.20201087&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2480273781%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2480273781&rft_id=info:pmid/33306919&rfr_iscdi=true |