Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 42
Filter
1.
Pediatr Radiol ; 52(10): 2017-2028, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2048213

ABSTRACT

In this review, we summarize early pulmonary complications related to cancer therapy in children and highlight characteristic findings on imaging that should be familiar to a radiologist reviewing imaging from pediatric cancer patients.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Child , Humans , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Neoplasms/therapy , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods
2.
Clin Imaging ; 90: 1-4, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1982805

ABSTRACT

Children with COVID-19 fare much better than adults but less is known about children with both COVID-19 and a cancer diagnosis in terms of clinical outcome and imaging. We describe our experience with a cohort of children with COVID-19 and cancer who have undergone medical imaging. We reviewed imaging and recorded clinical data and separated this group into two subgroups - hematologic and solid malignancies. Our observational data show that 1)children with hematologic malignancies may be at higher risk for complications, including death than, those with solid tumors, 2) that pulmonary imaging in the former group more often shows abnormalities and 3) that presence of pulmonary imaging abnormalities may portend an unfavorable outcome.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hematologic Neoplasms , Lung Diseases , Neoplasms , Child , Cohort Studies , Diagnostic Imaging , Hematologic Neoplasms/complications , Humans , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging
3.
Clin Imaging ; 86: 13-19, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1803772

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the quality of outside hospital imaging and associated reports submitted to us for reinterpretation related to clinical care at our tertiary cancer center. We compared the initial study interpretations to that of interpretations performed by subspecialty-trained abdominal radiologists at our center and whether this resulted in a change in inpatient treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed an institutional review board-approved retrospective single-institution study of 915 consecutive outside computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) abdominal imaging studies that had been submitted to our institution between August 1, 2020 and November 30, 2020. The assessed parameters included the quality and accuracy of the report, the technical quality of the imaging compared to that at our institution, the appropriateness of the imaging for staging or restaging, usage of oral and IV contrast, and CT slice thickness. Clinical notes, pathologic findings, and subsequent imaging were used to establish an accurate diagnosis and determine the effect on clinical treatment. Discrepancies between the initial and secondary interpretations were identified independently by a panel of radiologists to assess changes in treatment. The impact of discrepancies on treatment was evaluated based on current treatment guidelines. RESULTS: Of 744 CT (81%) and 171 MR (19%) outside imaging studies, 65% had suboptimal quality compared to the images at our institution, and 31% were inappropriate for oncological care purposes. Only 21% of CT studies had optimal slice thickness of <3 mm. Of 375 (41%) outside reports, 131 (34%) had discrepancies between secondary and initial interpretations. Of the 88 confirmed discrepant studies, 42 patients (48%) had a change in treatment based on the secondary interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: Imaging studies from outside institutions have variable image quality and are often inadequate for oncologic imaging. The secondary interpretations by subspecialty-trained radiologists resulted in treatment change.


Subject(s)
Cancer Care Facilities , Neoplasms , Humans , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Neoplasms/therapy , Observer Variation , Radiologists , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective Studies
4.
Talanta ; 245: 123486, 2022 Aug 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1796081

ABSTRACT

Cancer is the leading cause of death in many countries. The development of new methods for early screening of cancers is highly desired. Targeted metallomics has been successfully applied in the screening of cancers through quantification of elements in the matrix, which is time consuming and requires combined techniques for the quantification due to the large elemental difference in the matrix. This work proposed a non-targeted metallomics (NTM) approach through synchrotron radiation based X-ray fluorescence (SRXRF) and machine learning algorithms (MLAs) for the screening of cancers. One hundred serum samples were collected from cancer patients who were confirmed by pathological examination with 100 matched serum samples from healthy volunteers. The serum samples were studied with SRXRF and the spectra from both groups were directly clarified through MLAs, which did not require the quantification of elements. The NTM approach through SRXRF and MLAs is fast (5s for data collection for one sample) and accurate (over 96% accuracy) for cancer screening. Besides, this approach can also identify the most affected elements in cancer samples like Ca, Zn and Ti as we found, which may shed lights on the drug development for cancer treatment. This NTM approach can also be applied through commercially available XRF instruments or ICP-TOF-MS with MLAs. It has the potential for the screening and prediction of other diseases like COVID-19 and neurodegenerative diseases in a high throughput and least invasive way.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , COVID-19/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer , Humans , Machine Learning , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Spectrometry, X-Ray Emission , Synchrotrons , X-Rays
5.
Clin Imaging ; 85: 89-93, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1763642

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the proportion of published imaging studies relative to incidence and mortality rate per cancer type. METHODS: From a random sample of 2500 articles published in 2019 by the top 25 imaging-related journals, we included cancer imaging studies. The publication-to-incidence and publication-to-mortality ratios (defined as the publication rate divided by the proportional incidence and mortality rate, respectively) were calculated per cancer type. Ratios >1 indicate a higher publication rate compared to the relative incidence or mortality rate of a specific cancer. Ratios <1 indicate a lower publication rate compared to the relative incidence or mortality rate of a specific cancer. RESULTS: 620 original cancer imaging studies were included. Female breast cancer (20.2%), prostate cancer (13.0%), liver cancer (12.9%), lung cancer (8.8%), and cancers in the central nervous system (8.1%) comprised the top 5 of cancers investigated. Cancers in the central nervous system and liver had publication-to-incidence ratios >2, whereas nonmelanoma of the skin, leukemia, stomach cancer, and laryngeal cancer had publication-to-incidence ratios <0.2. Cancers in the prostate, central nervous system, female breast, and kidney had publication-to-mortality ratios >2, whereas esophageal cancer, stomach cancer, laryngeal cancer, and leukemia had publication-to-mortality ratios <0.2. CONCLUSION: This overview of published cancer imaging research may be informative and useful to all stakeholders in the field of cancer imaging. The potential causes of disproportionality between the publication rate vs. incidence and mortality rates of some cancer types are multifactorial and need to be further elucidated.


Subject(s)
Esophageal Neoplasms , Neoplasms , Prostatic Neoplasms , Stomach Neoplasms , Diagnostic Imaging , Humans , Incidence , Male , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Prostatic Neoplasms/complications
6.
J Nucl Med ; 63(2): 274-279, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1674255

ABSTRACT

Although the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can present as nonspecific clinical forms, subclinical cases represent an important route of transmission and a significant source of mortality, mainly in high-risk subpopulations such as cancer patients. A deeper knowledge of the metabolic shift in cells infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 could provide new insights about its pathogenic and host response and help to diagnose pulmonary involvement. We explored the potential added diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT scans in asymptomatic cancer patients with suspected COVID-19 pneumonia by investigating the association between metabolic and structural changes in the lung parenchyma. Methods: 18F-FDG PET/CT studies acquired between February 19 and May 29, 2020, were reviewed to identify those cancer patients with incidental findings suggestive of COVID-19 pneumonia. PET studies were interpreted through qualitative (visual) and semiquantitative (measurement of SUVmax) analysis evaluating lung findings. Several characteristic signs of COVID-19 pneumonia on CT were described as COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) categories (1-6). After comparing the SUVmax of pulmonary infiltrates among different CO-RADS categories, we explored the best potential cutoffs for pulmonary SUVmax against CO-RADS categories as the gold standard result to eliminate the possibility that the diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia exists. Results: On multimodal PET/CT imaging, CT signs classified as CO-RADS category 5 or 6 were found in 16 of 41 (39%) oncologic patients. SUVmax was higher in patients with categories 5 and 6 than in patients with category 4 (6.17 ± 0.82 vs. 3.78 ± 0.50, P = 0.04) or categories 2 and 3 (3.59 ± 0.41, P = 0.01). A specificity of 93.8% (95% CI, 71.7%-99.7%) and an accuracy of 92.9% were obtained when combining a CO-RADS score of 5 or 6 with an SUVmax of 2.45 in pulmonary infiltrates. Conclusion: In asymptomatic cancer patients, the metabolic activity in lung infiltrates is closely associated with several combined tomographic changes characteristic of COVID-19 pneumonia. Multimodal 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging could provide additional information during early diagnosis in selected predisposed patients during the pandemic. The prognostic implications of simultaneous radiologic and molecular findings in cancer patients and other subpopulations at high risk for COVID-19 pneumonia deserve further evaluation in prospective research.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18 , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography/methods , Radiopharmaceuticals , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Lung/metabolism , Lung/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/metabolism , Neoplasms/pathology
7.
Front Immunol ; 12: 838082, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1674340

ABSTRACT

Recombinant antibodies such as nanobodies are progressively demonstrating to be a valid alternative to conventional monoclonal antibodies also for clinical applications. Furthermore, they do not solely represent a substitute for monoclonal antibodies but their unique features allow expanding the applications of biotherapeutics and changes the pattern of disease treatment. Nanobodies possess the double advantage of being small and simple to engineer. This combination has promoted extremely diversified approaches to design nanobody-based constructs suitable for particular applications. Both the format geometry possibilities and the functionalization strategies have been widely explored to provide macromolecules with better efficacy with respect to single nanobodies or their combination. Nanobody multimers and nanobody-derived reagents were developed to image and contrast several cancer diseases and have shown their effectiveness in animal models. Their capacity to block more independent signaling pathways simultaneously is considered a critical advantage to avoid tumor resistance, whereas the mass of these multimeric compounds still remains significantly smaller than that of an IgG, enabling deeper penetration in solid tumors. When applied to CAR-T cell therapy, nanobodies can effectively improve the specificity by targeting multiple epitopes and consequently reduce the side effects. This represents a great potential in treating malignant lymphomas, acute myeloid leukemia, acute lymphoblastic leukemia, multiple myeloma and solid tumors. Apart from cancer treatment, multispecific drugs and imaging reagents built with nanobody blocks have demonstrated their value also for detecting and tackling neurodegenerative, autoimmune, metabolic, and infectious diseases and as antidotes for toxins. In particular, multi-paratopic nanobody-based constructs have been developed recently as drugs for passive immunization against SARS-CoV-2 with the goal of impairing variant survival due to resistance to antibodies targeting single epitopes. Given the enormous research activity in the field, it can be expected that more and more multimeric nanobody molecules will undergo late clinical trials in the next future. Systematic Review Registration.


Subject(s)
Single-Domain Antibodies/chemistry , Single-Domain Antibodies/therapeutic use , Animals , Autoimmune Diseases/immunology , Autoimmune Diseases/therapy , Communicable Diseases/immunology , Communicable Diseases/therapy , Humans , Immunomodulation , Molecular Imaging , Molecular Targeted Therapy , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Neoplasms/immunology , Neoplasms/therapy , Recombinant Proteins/chemistry , Recombinant Proteins/immunology , Recombinant Proteins/therapeutic use , Single-Domain Antibodies/immunology
8.
Eur Radiol ; 32(4): 2661-2671, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1491098

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the degree of parenchymal involvement on chest radiograph (CXR) at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis and its early radiologic evolution can predict adverse events including hospitalization, intubation, and death in patients with cancer. METHODS: Retrospective study of 627 COVID-19-positive patients between March and April 2020, of which 248 had baseline CXR within 72 h of diagnosis and 64 patients had follow-up wihtin72 h. CXRs were classified as abnormal (i.e., radiologic findings suggestive of COVID-19 infection were noted), normal, or indeterminate. Baseline and follow-up severity scores were calculated based on lung regions in abnormal CXRs. Statistical analysis was performed to determine associations between abnormal CXR or severity score with adverse events. RESULTS: Of 248 patients (median age = 65) with a baseline CXR, 172/248 (69%) had an abnormal baseline study, which was associated with hospitalization (p < 0.001), intubation (p = 0.001), and death (p = 0.005). For patients with solid neoplasms, when adjusted for stage, it was associated with hospitalization (p = 0.0002), intubation (p = 0.019), and death (p = 0.03). The median baseline severity score was 3 (range = 1-10); the greater the score, the higher the likelihood of adverse outcome (p < 0.003 for all). A baseline severity score > 9 predicted > 50% probability of intubation and a score of ≥ 10 predicted > 50% of probability of death. The baseline severity score was not correlated with cancer-related treatment. Early radiologic progression was not correlated with hospitalization, intubation, or death. CONCLUSION: The degree of parenchymal involvement on CXR within 72 h of COVID-19 diagnosis is associated with adverse outcomes in patients with cancer. KEY POINTS: • In patients with cancer, the presence and severity of radiologic manifestation of COVID-19 on chest radiographs within 72 h of COVID-19 diagnosis are associated with hospitalization, intubation, and death. • Early radiologic progression on chest radiographs is not correlated with adverse outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Aged , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Neoplasms/therapy , Radiography, Thoracic , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
10.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 217(3): 527-528, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1403390
11.
Emerg Radiol ; 28(6): 1073-1081, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1397017

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To analyze emergency department (ED) computerized tomography (CT) utilization in cancer patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed to identify cancer patients who received COVID-19 diagnosis within the single healthcare system and presented to the ED within 30 days of COVID-19 positive date between May 1 and December 31, 2020. RESULTS: In our 61 patients, the mean age was 72.5 years old, with 34% of patients (n = 21) on active cancer therapy and 66% (n = 40) on surveillance only. Most patients (n = 53) received their COVID-19 diagnosis within the ED, with 8 patients diagnosed prior to initial ED visit. The most common CT studies ordered within the ED were CT chest (n = 25), CT abdomen/pelvis (A/P) (n = 20), CT head (n = 8), and CT chest/abdomen/pelvis (C/A/P) (n = 7). COVID-19 findings were present on 33 scans, findings of worsening malignancy on 12 scans, and non-COVID non-cancer findings on 9 scans. Significant differences in CT severity score (p = 0.0001), indication for hospitalization (p = 0.026), length of hospitalization (p = 0.004), interventions (remdesivir, mechanical ventilation, and vasopressor support) while hospitalized (p < 0.05), and mortality (p = 0.042) were found between the prior diagnosis and ED diagnosis groups. No such differences were found between the active treatment and surveillance groups. CONCLUSION: ED CT imaging findings in patients with cancer and COVID-19 are predominantly related to COVID-19 infection, rather than cancer history or anti-cancer therapy status.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Aged , COVID-19 Testing , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
12.
Cancer Med ; 10(18): 6327-6335, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1344970

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the effects of COVID-19 on computed tomography (CT) imaging of cancer. METHODS: Cancer-related CTs performed at one academic hospital and three affiliated community hospitals in Massachusetts were retrospectively analyzed. Three periods of 2020 were considered as follows: pre-COVID-19 (1/5/20-3/14/20), COVID-19 peak (3/15/20-5/2/20), and post-COVID-19 peak (5/3/20-11/14/20). 15 March 2020 was the day a state of emergency was declared in MA; 3 May 2020 was the day our hospitals resumed to non-urgent imaging. The volumes were assessed by (1) Imaging indication: cancer screening, initial workup, active cancer, and surveillance; (2) Care setting: outpatient and inpatient, ED; (3) Hospital type: quaternary academic center (QAC), university-affiliated community hospital (UACH), and sole community hospitals (SCHs). RESULTS: During the COVID-19 peak, a significant drop in CT volumes was observed (-42.2%, p < 0.0001), with cancer screening, initial workup, active cancer, and cancer surveillance declining by 81.7%, 54.8%, 30.7%, and 44.7%, respectively (p < 0.0001). In the post-COVID-19 peak period, cancer screening and initial workup CTs did not recover (-11.7%, p = 0.037; -20.0%, p = 0.031), especially in the outpatient setting. CT volumes for active cancer recovered, but inconsistently across hospital types: the QAC experienced a 9.4% decline (p = 0.022) and the UACH a 41.5% increase (p < 0.001). Outpatient CTs recovered after the COVID-19 peak, but with a shift in utilization away from the QAC (-8.7%, p = 0.020) toward the UACH (+13.3%, p = 0.013). Inpatient and ED-based oncologic CTs increased post-peak (+20.0%, p = 0.004 and +33.2%, p = 0.009, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Cancer imaging was severely impacted during the COVID-19 pandemic. CTs for cancer screening and initial workup did not recover to pre-COVID-19 levels well into 2020, a finding that suggests more patients with advanced cancers may present in the future. A redistribution of imaging utilization away from the QAC and outpatient settings, toward the community hospitals and inpatient setting/ED was observed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals , Humans , Inpatients/statistics & numerical data , Massachusetts/epidemiology , Outpatients/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods
14.
Cancer Treat Rev ; 98: 102220, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1275253

ABSTRACT

As the world embarks on mass vaccination for COVID-19, we are beginning to encounter unintended dilemmas in imaging oncology patients; particularly with regards to FDG PET/CT. In some cases, vaccine-related lymphadenopathy and FDG uptake on PET/CT can mimic cancer and lead to confounding imaging results. These cases where findings overlap with cancer pose a significant dilemma for diagnostic purposes, follow-up, and management leading to possible treatment delays, unnecessary repeat imaging and sampling, and patient anxiety. These cases can largely be avoided by optimal coordination between vaccination and planned imaging as well as preemptive selection of vaccine administration site. This coordination hinges on patient, oncologist, and radiologists' awareness of this issue and collaboration. Through close communication and patient education, we believe this will eliminate significant challenges for our oncology patients as we strive to end this pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19/prevention & control , Lymphadenopathy/diagnosis , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography/standards , Vaccination/adverse effects , COVID-19/virology , Diagnosis, Differential , Disease Progression , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18/metabolism , Humans , Lymphadenopathy/chemically induced , Lymphadenopathy/diagnostic imaging , Neoplasms/chemically induced , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Radiopharmaceuticals/metabolism , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
16.
Indian J Cancer ; 58(2): 248-258, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1261388

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) causing a pandemic mostly results in mild symptoms; however, it can evolve into serious complications. It is emphasized that if the term from the recent anticancer treatment to the diagnosis of COVID-19 was short, the probability of serious events increased in cancer patients. Therefore, early detection of COVID-19 and prevention of serious events is very important. We aimed to investigate whether it is possible to detect COVID-19 early by positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT). METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the images and clinical findings of patients who underwent PET/CT due to malignancy and whose COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test were detected positive subsequently. RESULTS: Eight cancer patients with positive COVID-19 PCR tests were included in the study. PET/CT revealed subpleural ground-glass opacities (GGOs) showing mild fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake that could be compatible with COVID-19 in 4 of 8 patients. The number of affected lobes ranged from 1-4. All patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 by PCR test when symptoms and/or lung findings worsened on the days after PET/CT. The time interval between the last anticancer treatment and COVID-19 diagnosis in five patients was ≤7 days. During the follow-up, six of the cases (75%) needed mechanical ventilation and died later. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 may be recognised early by detecting incidental findings in PET/CT, especially in asymptomatic cancer patients. Potential complications may be prevented by early diagnosis and anticancer therapy changes. Therefore, possible COVID-19 findings in PET/CT should be reported and the patient should be referred to relevant clinician.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/standards , COVID-19/diagnosis , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography/trends , Adult , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Neoplasms/virology , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography/standards , Positron-Emission Tomography , Radiopharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
17.
Clin Nucl Med ; 47(1): e56-e58, 2022 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1240978

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: COVID vaccination has begun in most of the countries. Older population and high-risk groups are prioritized for vaccination. Postvaccination imaging in cancer patients may show effects of the immune response to the vaccine. As such, it is important to know the timing and laterality of the vaccination as the reactive lymph nodes in the ipsilateral axilla can be seen on the imaging. We present a case of DOTATATE-avid nonpathologically enlarged lymph nodes in ipsilateral axilla and linear tracer uptake in the deltoid muscle on a patient imaged for a recent diagnosis of rectal neuroendocrine neoplasm.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Lymph Nodes , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Receptors, Somatostatin , Axilla , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Lymph Nodes/diagnostic imaging , Male , Middle Aged , Positron-Emission Tomography , Radionuclide Imaging
19.
Radiol Imaging Cancer ; 2(6): e200058, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1155957

ABSTRACT

Patients with cancer have been negatively impacted during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, as many of these individuals may be immunosuppressed and of older age. Additionally, cancer follow-up or imaging appointments have been delayed in many clinics around the world. Postponement of routine screening exams will result in delays in new cancer diagnoses. Clinics are continuing to monitor and adapt their appointment schedules based on local outbreaks of COVID-19. Studies on COVID-19 in patients with cancer are limited, but consistently indicate that this population is at risk for more severe COVID-19 illness. Data from recent studies also suggest that pediatric patients with cancer have a lower risk of severe COVID-19 illness compared to adults. Certain features of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection detected by lung, brain, and gastrointestinal imaging may confound radiologists' interpretation of cancer diagnosis, staging, and treatment response. Lastly, as clinics begin to re-open for routine appointments, protocols have been put in place to reduce SARS-CoV-2 exposure to patients during their visits. This review details different perspectives on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with cancer and on cancer imaging. Keywords: Abdomen/GI, Cardiac, Infection, Nervous-Peripheral.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Diagnostic Imaging/methods , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Patient Care/methods , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL