Performance of the Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System as applied by general neuroradiologists to predict recurrence of head and neck cancers.
NI-RADS
head and neck cancer
neuroradiology
recurrence
structured reporting
Journal
Head & neck
ISSN: 1097-0347
Titre abrégé: Head Neck
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8902541
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2022
10 2022
Historique:
revised:
04
05
2022
received:
25
02
2022
accepted:
16
06
2022
pubmed:
9
7
2022
medline:
9
9
2022
entrez:
8
7
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System (NI-RADS) is used to assess imaging after head and neck cancer treatment. We evaluated NI-RADS with general neuroradiologists rather than with head and neck subspecialists. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging examinations with/without positron emission tomography from May 2018 to September 2020 were retrospectively identified. NI-RADS scores at the primary site and lymph nodes were provided by 21 neuroradiologists. Recurrence status was based on clinical and imaging findings. Area under the curve (AUC) was used to assess accuracy. We assessed 608 scans from 464 patients. For NI-RADS categories 1, 2, and 3, primary site recurrence rates were 5%, 29%, and 65% with AUC of 0.765, while lymph node recurrence rates were 3%, 10%, and 80% with AUC of 0.820. NI-RADS as used by general neuroradiologists is effective in separating head and neck cancers into discrete categories for predicting recurrent disease.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System (NI-RADS) is used to assess imaging after head and neck cancer treatment. We evaluated NI-RADS with general neuroradiologists rather than with head and neck subspecialists.
METHODS
Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging examinations with/without positron emission tomography from May 2018 to September 2020 were retrospectively identified. NI-RADS scores at the primary site and lymph nodes were provided by 21 neuroradiologists. Recurrence status was based on clinical and imaging findings. Area under the curve (AUC) was used to assess accuracy.
RESULTS
We assessed 608 scans from 464 patients. For NI-RADS categories 1, 2, and 3, primary site recurrence rates were 5%, 29%, and 65% with AUC of 0.765, while lymph node recurrence rates were 3%, 10%, and 80% with AUC of 0.820.
CONCLUSIONS
NI-RADS as used by general neuroradiologists is effective in separating head and neck cancers into discrete categories for predicting recurrent disease.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2257-2264Informations de copyright
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Global Cancer Observatory. International Agency for Research on Cancer. World Health Organization. Cancer over time. Available at: https://gco.iarc.fr/. Accessed February 16, 2022.
Langendijk JA, Psyrri A. The prognostic significance of p16 overexpression in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: implications for treatment strategies and future clinical studies. Ann Oncol. 2010;21(10):1931-1934. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdq439
Parvathaneni U, Lavertu P, Gibson MK, Glastonbury CM. Advances in diagnosis and multidisciplinary management of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: state of the art. Radiographics. 2019;39(7):2055-2068. doi:10.1148/rg.2019190007
Schwartz LH, Panicek DM, Berk AR, Li Y, Hricak H. Improving communication of diagnostic radiology findings through structured reporting. Radiology. 2011;260(1):174-181. doi:10.1148/radiol.11101913
Mamlouk MD, Chang PC, Saket RR. Contextual radiology reporting: a new approach to neuroradiology structured templates. AJNR Am J Neuradiol. 2018;39(8):1406-1414. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5697
Morgan TA, Helibrun ME, Kahn CE Jr. Reporting initiative of the Radiological Society of North America: progress and new directions. Radiology. 2014;273(3):642-645. doi:10.1148/radiol.14141227
An JY, Unsdorfer KML, Weinreb JC. BI-RADS, C-RADS, CAD-RADS, LI-RADS, Lung-RADS, NI-RADS, O-RADS, PI-RADS, TI-RADS: reporting and data systems. Radiographics. 2019;39(5):1435-1436. doi:10.1148/rg.2019190087
Aiken AH, Rath TJ, Anzai Y, et al. ACR neck imaging reporting and data systems (NI-RADS): a white paper of the ACR NI-RADS Committee. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15(8):1097-1108. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2018.05.006
Krieger DA, Hudgins PA, Nayak GK, et al. Initial performance of NI-RADS to predict residual or recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017;38(6):1193-1199. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5157
Wangaryattawanich P, Branstetter BF, Ly JD, Duvvuri U, Heron DE, Rath TJ. Positive predictive value of neck imaging reporting and data system categories 3 and 4 posttreatment FDG-PET/CT in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2020;41(6):1070-1075. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6589
Elsholtz FHJ, Ro SR, Shnayien S, et al. Inter- and Intrareader agreement of NI-RADS in the interpretation of surveillance contrast-enhanced CT after treatment of Oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2020;41(5):859-865. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6529
Hameed HAKA, Hafeez ZMA, Aziz TTA, Abdelrahman AS, Ashour MMM. Role of neck imaging reporting and data system (NI-RADS) in the prediction of local and regional recurrence of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma by cross sectional imaging modalities. Ain Shams Med J. 2019;70:647-656. doi:10.21608/asmj.2019.101274
Hsu D, Chokshi FH, Hudgins PA, et al. Predictive value of first posttreatment imaging using standardized reporting in head and neck cancer. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019;161(6):978-985. doi:10.1177/0194599819865235
Ward RD. Encore: A Robust and Easy to Use Dictation and Radiology Information System Query Tool. Presented at: Society for Imaging and Informatics in Medicine Annual Meeting; Pittsburgh, PA; June 1-3, 2017.
Koyfman SA, Ismaila N, Crook D, et al. Management of the neck in squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity and oropharynx: ASCO clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(20):1753-1774. doi:10.1200/JCO.18.01921
Obuchowski NA. Nonparametric analysis of clustered ROC curve data. Biometrics. 1997;53(2):567-578. doi:10.2307/2533958