Radiology. Imaging cancer最新文献

{"title":"Artificial Intelligence in Screening Mammography: How Do Patients Feel?","authors":"Lauren Burkard-Mandel, Bonnie N Joe","doi":"10.1148/rycan.250215","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.250215","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 3","pages":"e250215"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12130693/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144035414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Delayed Contrast-enhanced MRI Distinguishes Tumor from Radiation Treatment Effect.","authors":"Rojine Tiffany Ariani, Nzhde Agazaryan, Steve Tenn, Robert Chin, Tania Kaprealian, Ricky R Savjani","doi":"10.1148/rycan.240388","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.240388","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 3","pages":"e240388"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12130689/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144050928","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Giant Cutaneous Fibrous Histiocytoma.","authors":"Cen Jin, Jiuming Jiang, Lihua Gong, Libin Xu, Meng Li","doi":"10.1148/rycan.250017","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.250017","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 3","pages":"e250017"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12130723/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144050930","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comparison of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Reporting and Data System Version 1.0 versus 2.0 for Prostate Cancer Assessment.","authors":"Yassir Edrees Almalki, Mohammad Abd Alkhalik Basha, Susan Adil Ali, Ragab Hani Donkol, Maged Abdel Galil Hamed, Maha Ibrahim Metwally, Rania Mostafa A Hassan, Reem Abdel Fattah Frere, Amro Ahmed Esmat Abdul Rahman, Yasmin Ibrahim Libda, Nader E M Mahmoud, Mohamed Hesham Saleh Saleh Radwan, Ibrahim M Eladl, Amgad M Elsheikh, Mohamed M A Zaitoun, Al-Shaimaa Mohamed Mohamed, Ghada Adel AbdelHamid, Heba Fathy Tantawy, Shimaa Elsayed Badr, Walid Mosallam, Mohammad Al-Shatouri, Waleed S Abo Shanab, Tamer Mahmoud Dawoud, Hamada M Khater, Rasha Taha Abouelkheir, Heba Abdelhamed, Ahmed Ali Obaya, Basant Sh Elshafaay, Ahmed M Abdelkhalik Basha, Reem M Abdelkhalik Mohammad, Noha Yahia Ebaid","doi":"10.1148/rycan.240390","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.240390","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Purpose To assess diagnostic performance and reliability of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Reporting and Data System (PSMA-RADS) version 1.0 in evaluating prostate cancer (PCa) and compare it with the updated version (version 2.0). Materials and Methods This prospective, multicenter study was conducted between June 2022 and August 2024. Participants with PCa underwent gallium 68 (⁶⁸Ga) PSMA-11 PET/CT imaging and were divided into three groups: new diagnoses, biochemical recurrence (BCR), and follow-up. Three nuclear medicine radiologists independently interpreted the images using PSMA-RADS version 1.0, followed by a retrospective assessment using PSMA-RADS version 2.0. Diagnostic performance was calculated using linear mixed-model analysis. Histopathology and follow-up data served as reference standards. Interrater agreement was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results The study included 443 male participants (mean age, 68.6 years ± 8.1 [SD]) divided into new diagnoses (<i>n</i> = 164), BCR (<i>n</i> = 108), and follow-up (<i>n</i> = 171) groups. Compared with PSMA-RADS version 1.0, version 2.0 improved diagnostic accuracy in new diagnoses (95.9% vs 97.4%, <i>P</i> = .02), BCR (92.6% vs 95.7%, <i>P</i> = .004), and follow-up (88.7% vs 94.7%, <i>P</i> < .001). Sensitivity substantially improved in follow-up cases (87.7% vs 95.7%, <i>P</i> < .001). Interrater agreement was comparable between two versions, with lowest reliability in soft tissue evaluation (ICC = 0.36-0.50). Introduction of the PSMA-RADS 5T category to version 2.0 enhanced the characterization of treated metastases, improving correlation with prostate-specific antigen dynamics (<i>r</i>_s = 0.74 vs 0.61, <i>P</i> < .001) and the discrimination of treatment response (88.7% vs 82.3%, <i>P</i> = .02). Conclusion Both PSMA-RADS versions 1.0 and 2.0 were highly accurate and reliable for PCa imaging, with version 2.0 offering significant improvements, particularly in challenging follow-up and BCR cases. <b>Keywords:</b> PET/CT, Urinary, Prostate, Neoplasms-Primary, Oncology, Comparative Studies, Prostate Cancer, PSMA-RADS, Diagnostic Performance, Reliability Clinical trial registration no.: NCT06359717 <i>Supplemental material is available for this article.</i> © RSNA, 2025.</p>","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 3","pages":"e240390"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12130719/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144079796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Dedifferentiated Chondrosarcoma with Multiple Synchronous Osteosarcomas in a Young Female Patient.","authors":"Pranjal Rai, Kridhi Mahajan, Amit Kumar Janu","doi":"10.1148/rycan.240522","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.240522","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 3","pages":"e240522"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12130714/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144079876","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Eccrine Spiradenoma with Diffusion Restriction at MRI.","authors":"Dhairya A Lakhani, Rachel Marchalik, Kenneth Akakpo, Leila J Mady, Rohini Nadgir","doi":"10.1148/rycan.240466","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.240466","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 3","pages":"e240466"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12130706/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143781000","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Implementation of Low-Dose CT Lung Cancer Screening in an Ethnically and Socioeconomically Diverse Population.","authors":"Netanja I Harlianto, Pim A de Jong","doi":"10.1148/rycan.259009","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.259009","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 3","pages":"e259009"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12130694/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144022075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Patient Perception of Artificial Intelligence Use in Interpretation of Screening Mammograms: A Survey Study.","authors":"B Bersu Ozcan, Basak E Dogan, Yin Xi, Emily E Knippa","doi":"10.1148/rycan.240290","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.240290","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Purpose To assess patient perceptions of artificial intelligence (AI) use in the interpretation of screening mammograms. Materials and Methods In a prospective, institutional review board-approved study, all patients undergoing mammography screening at the authors' institution between February 2023 and August 2023 were offered a 29-question survey. Age, race and ethnicity, education, income level, and history of breast cancer and biopsy were collected. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify the independent factors associated with participants' acceptance of AI use. Results Of the 518 participants, the majority were between the ages of 40 and 69 years (377 of 518, 72.8%), at least college graduates (347 of 518, 67.0%), and non-Hispanic White (262 of 518, 50.6%). Participant-reported knowledge of AI was none or minimal in 76.5% (396 of 518). Stand-alone AI interpretation was accepted by 4.44% (23 of 518), whereas 71.0% (368 of 518) preferred AI to be used as a second reader. After an AI-reported abnormal screening, 88.9% (319 of 359) requested radiologist review versus 51.3% (184 of 359) of radiologist recall review by AI (<i>P</i> < .001). In cases of discrepancy, higher rate of participants would undergo diagnostic examination for radiologist recalls compared with AI recalls (94.2% [419 of 445] vs 92.6% [412 of 445]; <i>P</i> = .20]. Higher education was associated with higher AI acceptance (odds ratio [OR] 2.05, 95% CI: 1.31, 3.20; <i>P</i> = .002). Race was associated with higher concern for bias in Hispanic versus non-Hispanic White participants (OR 3.32, 95% CI: 1.15, 9.61; <i>P</i> = .005) and non-Hispanic Black versus non-Hispanic White participants (OR 4.31, 95% CI: 1.50, 12.39; <i>P</i> = .005). Conclusion AI use as a second reader of screening mammograms was accepted by participants. Participants' race and education level were significantly associated with AI acceptance. <b>Keywords:</b> Breast, Mammography, Artificial Intelligence <i>Supplemental material is available for this article.</i> Published under a CC BY 4.0 license.</p>","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 3","pages":"e240290"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12130716/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144025898","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Safety, Efficacy, and Adjacent-level Fracture Risk Following Vertebral Augmentation and Radiofrequency Ablation for the Treatment of Spine Metastases in Patients with Cancer.","authors":"Jeremiah Stringam, Koustav Pal, Andrew Niekamp, Rahim Jiwani, Iwan Paolucci, Joshua D Kuban, Zeyad Metwalli, Steven Huang, Peiman Habibollahi, Stephen Chen, Steven Yevich, Milan Patel, Sumit K Subudhi, Matthew Campbell, Amol Ghia, Claudio Tatsui, Rahul A Sheth","doi":"10.1148/rycan.240122","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.240122","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Purpose To evaluate the safety and efficacy of vertebral augmentation (VA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for treating pathologic spinal fractures in patients with cancer and adjacent fracture risk following treatment. Materials and Methods This single-institution retrospective study, conducted from January 2017 to September 2020, included patients with cancer who underwent percutaneous VA with or without spine RFA for pathologic spine compression fractures. The primary outcome was pain reduction, assessed using the 10-point visual analog scale before the procedure, at first follow-up, and 2-4 weeks after the procedure. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with epidural cement leak. Results A total of 638 spinal levels in 335 patients (median age, 65 years [IQR, 58-74 years]; 147 female, 188 male) were treated. Epidural tumor and retropulsion of bone fragments were present in 15% (93 of 638) and 13% (81 of 638) of treated levels, respectively, while posterior wall erosion was observed in 30% (190 of 638). Substantial pain improvement (greater than two-point reduction) occurred in 81% (519 of 638) of cases. Factors associated with decreased risk of epidural cement leak included RFA (42% no leak vs 38% leak, <i>P</i> = .03) and lumbar treatments (49% no leak vs 38% leak, <i>P</i> = .02). Adjacent-level fractures occurred in 10.4% of patients. The total complication rate (National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 or higher) was 0.6% (four of 638). Conclusion VA and RFA are safe and efficacious treatments for spine fractures in patients with cancer. <b>Keywords:</b> Ablation Techniques, Kyphoplasty, Vertebroplasty © RSNA, 2025.</p>","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 3","pages":"e240122"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12130721/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144079878","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The TRANSLATE Trial: Transrectal versus Transperineal Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Detection.","authors":"Radhika Rajeev, Hero K Hussain","doi":"10.1148/rycan.259010","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.259010","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 3","pages":"e259010"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12130713/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144187842","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}