ABSTRACT
The cross-sectional imaging findings play a crucial role in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Recent studies have shown that imaging findings of HCC are not only relevant for the diagnosis of HCC, but also for identifying genetic and pathologic characteristics and determining prognosis. Imaging findings such as rim arterial phase hyperenhancement, arterial phase peritumoral hyperenhancement, hepatobiliary phase peritumoral hypointensity, non-smooth tumor margin, low apparent diffusion coefficient, and the LR-M category of the Liver Imaging-Reporting and Data System have been reported to be associated with poor prognosis. In contrast, imaging findings such as enhancing capsule appearance, hepatobiliary phase hyperintensity, and fat in mass have been reported to be associated with a favorable prognosis. Most of these imaging findings were examined in retrospective, single-center studies that were not adequately validated. However, the imaging findings can be applied for deciding the treatment strategy for HCC, if their significance can be confirmed by a large multicenter study. In this literature, we would like to review imaging findings related to the prognosis of HCC as well as their associated clinicopathological characteristics.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#To assess associations between surveillance intervals in a national hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance program and receiving curative treatment and mortality using nationwide cohort data for Korea. @*Materials and Methods@#Using the National Health Insurance Service Database of Korea, we retrospectively identified 3201852 patients, the target population of the national HCC surveillance program, between 2008 and 2017. After exclusion, a total of 64674 HCC patients were divided based on surveillance intervals: never screened, ≤6 months (6M), 7–12 months (1Y), 13–24 months (2Y), and 25–36 months (3Y). Associations for surveillance interval with the chance to receive curative therapy and all-cause mortality were analyzed. @*Results@#The 6M group (51.9%) received curative therapy more often than the other groups (1Y, 48.3%; 2Y, 43.8%; 3Y, 41.3%; never screened, 34.5%). Odds ratio for receiving curative therapy among the other surveillance interval groups (1Y, 0.87; 2Y, 0.76; 3Y, 0.77;never screened, 0.57; p<0.001) were significantly lower than that of the 6M group. The hazard ratios (HRs) of all-cause mortality were 1.07, 1.14, and 1.37 for 2Y, 3Y, and never screened groups. The HR for the 1Y group (0.96; p=0.092) was not significantly different, and it was lower (0.91; p<0.001) than that of the 6M group after adjustment for lead-time bias. Curative therapy was associated with survival benefits (HR, 0.26; p<0.001). @*Conclusion@#HCC surveillance, especially at a surveillance interval of 6 months, increases the chance to receive curative therapy.
ABSTRACT
Imaging studies play an important role in the detection, diagnosis, assessment of resectability, staging, and determination of patient-tailored treatment options for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Recently, for patients diagnosed with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancers, it is recommended to consider curative-intent surgery following neoadjuvant or palliative therapy, if possible. This review covers how to interpret imaging tests and what to consider when assessing resectability, diagnosing distant metastasis, and re-assessing the resectability of pancreatic cancer after neoadjuvant or palliative therapy.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#To assess associations between surveillance intervals in a national hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance program and receiving curative treatment and mortality using nationwide cohort data for Korea. @*Materials and Methods@#Using the National Health Insurance Service Database of Korea, we retrospectively identified 3201852 patients, the target population of the national HCC surveillance program, between 2008 and 2017. After exclusion, a total of 64674 HCC patients were divided based on surveillance intervals: never screened, ≤6 months (6M), 7–12 months (1Y), 13–24 months (2Y), and 25–36 months (3Y). Associations for surveillance interval with the chance to receive curative therapy and all-cause mortality were analyzed. @*Results@#The 6M group (51.9%) received curative therapy more often than the other groups (1Y, 48.3%; 2Y, 43.8%; 3Y, 41.3%; never screened, 34.5%). Odds ratio for receiving curative therapy among the other surveillance interval groups (1Y, 0.87; 2Y, 0.76; 3Y, 0.77;never screened, 0.57; p<0.001) were significantly lower than that of the 6M group. The hazard ratios (HRs) of all-cause mortality were 1.07, 1.14, and 1.37 for 2Y, 3Y, and never screened groups. The HR for the 1Y group (0.96; p=0.092) was not significantly different, and it was lower (0.91; p<0.001) than that of the 6M group after adjustment for lead-time bias. Curative therapy was associated with survival benefits (HR, 0.26; p<0.001). @*Conclusion@#HCC surveillance, especially at a surveillance interval of 6 months, increases the chance to receive curative therapy.
ABSTRACT
Imaging studies play an important role in the detection, diagnosis, assessment of resectability, staging, and determination of patient-tailored treatment options for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Recently, for patients diagnosed with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancers, it is recommended to consider curative-intent surgery following neoadjuvant or palliative therapy, if possible. This review covers how to interpret imaging tests and what to consider when assessing resectability, diagnosing distant metastasis, and re-assessing the resectability of pancreatic cancer after neoadjuvant or palliative therapy.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors associated with thyroid cancer, focusing on first-degree family history and ultrasonography (US) features, in euthyroid asymptomatic patients with thyroid nodules. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 1310 thyroid nodules of 1254 euthyroid asymptomatic patients who underwent US-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy between November 2012 and August 2013. Nodule size and clinical risk factors-such as patient age, gender, first-degree family history of thyroid cancer, multiplicity on US and serum thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels-were considered together with US features to compare benign and malignant nodules. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the risk of thyroid malignancy according to clinical and US characteristics. RESULTS: Although all of the clinical factors and US findings were significantly different between patients with benign and malignant nodules, a solitary lesion on US (p = 0.041-0.043), US features and male gender (p < 0.001) were significant independent risk factors for thyroid malignancy in a multivariate analysis. Patient age, a first-degree family history of thyroid cancer and high normal serum TSH levels did not independently significantly increase the risk of thyroid cancer. However, multicollinearity existed between US assessment and patient age, first-degree family history of thyroid cancer and serum TSH values. CONCLUSION: Ultrasonography findings should be the primary criterion used to decide the management of euthyroid asymptomatic patients with thyroid nodules. The concept of first-degree family history as a risk factor for thyroid malignancy should be further studied in asymptomatic patients.