Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Gynecologic oncology tumor board: the central role of the radiologist

  • Review
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This manuscript is a collaborative, multi-institutional effort by members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology Uterine and Ovarian Cancer Disease Focus Panel and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology Women Pelvic Imaging working group. The manuscript reviews the key role radiologists play at tumor board and highlights key imaging findings that guide management decisions in patients with the most common gynecologic malignancies including ovarian cancer, cervical cancer, and endometrial cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. El Saghir NS, Keating NL, Carlson RW, Khoury KE, Fallowfield L (2014) Tumor boards: optimizing the structure and improving efficiency of multidisciplinary management of patients with cancer worldwide. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book:e461-466.

  2. Cohen P, Tan AL, Penman A (2009) The multidisciplinary tumor conference in gynecologic oncology--does it alter management? Int J Gynecol Cancer 19:1470-1472.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Zimlichman E, Nicklin W, Aggarwal R, Bates DW (2021) Health Care 2030: The Coming Transformation. NEJM Catalyst Innovations in Care Delivery

  4. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A (2022) Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 72:7-33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Reinhold C, Rockall A, Sadowski EA, Siegelman ES, Maturen KE, Vargas HA, Forstner R, Glanc P, Andreotti RF, Thomassin-Naggara I (2021) Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting Lexicon for MRI: A White Paper of the ACR Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data Systems MRI Committee. J Am Coll Radiol 18:713-729.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sadowski EA, Thomassin-Naggara I, Rockall A, Maturen KE, Forstner R, Jha P, Nougaret S, Siegelman ES, Reinhold C (2022) O-RADS MRI Risk Stratification System: Guide for Assessing Adnexal Lesions from the ACR O-RADS Committee. Radiology 303:35-47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhang Q, Dai X, Li W (2023) Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of O-RADS Ultrasound and O-RADS MRI for Risk Assessment of Ovarian and Adnexal Lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol:1-13.

  8. Jeong YY, Outwater EK, Kang HK (2000) Imaging evaluation of ovarian masses. Radiographics 20:1445-1470.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bharwani N, Reznek RH, Rockall AG (2011) Ovarian Cancer Management: the role of imaging and diagnostic challenges. Eur J Radiol 78:41-51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Vanderpuye VD, Clemenceau JRV, Temin S, Aziz Z, Burke WM, Cevallos NL, Chuang LT, Colgan TJ, Del Carmen MG, Fujiwara K, Kohn EC, Gonzales Nogales JE, Konney TO, Mukhopadhyay A, Paudel BD, Toth I, Wilailak S, Ghebre RG (2021) Assessment of Adult Women With Ovarian Masses and Treatment of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: ASCO Resource-Stratified Guideline. JCO Glob Oncol 7:1032-1066.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Iyer VR, Lee SI (2010) MRI, CT, and PET/CT for ovarian cancer detection and adnexal lesion characterization. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:311-321.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vergote I, Denys H, De Greve J, Gennigens C, Van De Vijver K, Kerger J, Vuylsteke P, Baurain JF (2020) Treatment algorithm in patients with ovarian cancer. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 12:227-239.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Avesani G, Arshad M, Lu H, Fotopoulou C, Cannone F, Melotti R, Aboagye E, Rockall A (2020) Radiological assessment of Peritoneal Cancer Index on preoperative CT in ovarian cancer is related to surgical outcome and survival. Radiol Med 125:770-776.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mazzei MA, Khader L, Cirigliano A, Cioffi Squitieri N, Guerrini S, Forzoni B, Marrelli D, Roviello F, Mazzei FG, Volterrani L (2013) Accuracy of MDCT in the preoperative definition of Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer who underwent peritonectomy and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Abdom Imaging 38:1422-1430.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Alyami M, Hubner M, Grass F, Bakrin N, Villeneuve L, Laplace N, Passot G, Glehen O, Kepenekian V (2019) Pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy: rationale, evidence, and potential indications. Lancet Oncol 20:e368-e377.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kang SK, Reinhold C, Atri M, Benson CB, Bhosale PR, Jhingran A, Lakhman Y, al. E ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Staging and Follow-up of Ovarian Cancer American College of Radiology.

  17. Castellani F, Nganga EC, Dumas L, Banerjee S, Rockall AG (2019) Imaging in the pre-operative staging of ovarian cancer. Abdom Radiol (NY) 44:685-696.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Darras KE, Clark SJ, Kang H, Mohammed MF, Barrett S, Chang SD, Harris AC, Nicolaou S, McLaughlin PD (2019) Virtual monoenergetic reconstruction of contrast-enhanced CT scans of the abdomen and pelvis at 40 keV improves the detection of peritoneal metastatic deposits. Abdom Radiol (NY) 44:422-428.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schmidt S, Meuli RA, Achtari C, Prior JO (2015) Peritoneal carcinomatosis in primary ovarian cancer staging: comparison between MDCT, MRI, and 18F-FDG PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med 40:371-377.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kuroki L, Guntupalli SR (2020) Treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer. BMJ 371:m3773.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sahdev A (2016) CT in ovarian cancer staging: how to review and report with emphasis on abdominal and pelvic disease for surgical planning. Cancer Imaging 16:19.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Qayyum A, Coakley FV, Westphalen AC, Hricak H, Okuno WT, Powell B (2005) Role of CT and MR imaging in predicting optimal cytoreduction of newly diagnosed primary epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 96:301-306.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nougaret S, Addley HC, Colombo PE, Fujii S, Al Sharif SS, Tirumani SH, Jardon K, Sala E, Reinhold C (2012) Ovarian carcinomatosis: how the radiologist can help plan the surgical approach. Radiographics 32:1775-1800; discussion 1800-1773.

  24. Herzog TJ (2004) Recurrent ovarian cancer: how important is it to treat to disease progression? Clin Cancer Res 10:7439-7449.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Manganaro L, Gigli S, Antonelli A, Saldari M, Tomao F, Marchetti C, Anastasi E, Laghi A (2019) Imaging strategy in recurrent ovarian cancer: a practical review. Abdom Radiol (NY) 44:1091-1102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Testa AC, Di Legge A, Virgilio B, Bonatti M, Manfredi R, Mirk P, Rufini V (2014) Which imaging technique should we use in the follow up of gynaecological cancer? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 28:769-791.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gu P, Pan LL, Wu SQ, Sun L, Huang G (2009) CA 125, PET alone, PET-CT, CT and MRI in diagnosing recurrent ovarian carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 71:164-174.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bhatla N, Aoki D, Sharma DN, Sankaranarayanan R (2018) Cancer of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 143 Suppl 2:22-36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Balcacer P, Shergill A, Litkouhi B (2019) MRI of cervical cancer with a surgical perspective: staging, prognostic implications and pitfalls. Abdom Radiol (NY) 44:2557-2571.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Salib MY, Russell JHB, Stewart VR, Sudderuddin SA, Barwick TD, Rockall AG, Bharwani N (2020) 2018 FIGO Staging Classification for Cervical Cancer: Added Benefits of Imaging. Radiographics 40:1807-1822.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Dhanda S, Thakur M, Kerkar R, Jagmohan P (2014) Diffusion-weighted imaging of gynecologic tumors: diagnostic pearls and potential pitfalls. Radiographics 34:1393-1416.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Cervical Cancer (Version 1.2022). National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

  33. Rockall AG, Qureshi M, Papadopoulou I, Saso S, Butterfield N, Thomassin-Naggara I, Farthing A, Smith JR, Bharwani N (2016) Role of Imaging in Fertility-sparing Treatment of Gynecologic Malignancies. Radiographics 36:2214-2233.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Patel-Lippmann K, Robbins JB, Barroilhet L, Anderson B, Sadowski EA, Boyum J (2017) MR Imaging of Cervical Cancer. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 25:635-649.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Manganaro L, Lakhman Y, Bharwani N, Gui B, Gigli S, Vinci V, Rizzo S, Kido A, Cunha TM, Sala E, Rockall A, Forstner R, Nougaret S (2021) Staging, recurrence and follow-up of uterine cervical cancer using MRI: Updated Guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology after revised FIGO staging 2018. Eur Radiol 31:7802-7816.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Otero-Garcia MM, Mesa-Alvarez A, Nikolic O, Blanco-Lobato P, Basta-Nikolic M, de Llano-Ortega RM, Paredes-Velazquez L, Nikolic N, Szewczyk-Bieda M (2019) Role of MRI in staging and follow-up of endometrial and cervical cancer: pitfalls and mimickers. Insights Imaging 10:19.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Patel K, Foster NR, Kumar A, Grudem M, Longenbach S, Bakkum-Gamez J, Haddock M, Dowdy S, Jatoi A (2015) Hydronephrosis in patients with cervical cancer: an assessment of morbidity and survival. Support Care Cancer 23:1303-1309.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Saleh M, Virarkar M, Javadi S, Elsherif SB, de Castro Faria S, Bhosale P (2020) Cervical Cancer: 2018 Revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Staging System and the Role of Imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 214:1182-1195.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Gee MS, Atri M, Bandos AI, Mannel RS, Gold MA, Lee SI (2018) Identification of Distant Metastatic Disease in Uterine Cervical and Endometrial Cancers with FDG PET/CT: Analysis from the ACRIN 6671/GOG 0233 Multicenter Trial. Radiology 287:176-184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Friedlander M, Grogan M, Force USPST (2002) Guidelines for the treatment of recurrent and metastatic cervical cancer. Oncologist 7:342-347.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Chao X, Fan J, Song X, You Y, Wu H, Wu M, Li L (2020) Diagnostic Strategies for Recurrent Cervical Cancer: A Cohort Study. Front Oncol 10:591253.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Schmidt AM, Imesch P, Fink D, Egger H (2012) Indications and long-term clinical outcomes in 282 patients with pelvic exenteration for advanced or recurrent cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 125:604-609.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A (2021) Cancer Statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin 71:7-33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Constantine GD, Kessler G, Graham S, Goldstein SR (2019) Increased Incidence of Endometrial Cancer Following the Women's Health Initiative: An Assessment of Risk Factors. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 28:237-243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Lewin SN, Herzog TJ, Barrena Medel NI, Deutsch I, Burke WM, Sun X, Wright JD (2010) Comparative performance of the 2009 international Federation of gynecology and obstetrics' staging system for uterine corpus cancer. Obstet Gynecol 116:1141-1149.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Beddy P, O'Neill AC, Yamamoto AK, Addley HC, Reinhold C, Sala E (2012) FIGO staging system for endometrial cancer: added benefits of MR imaging. Radiographics 32:241-254.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Amant F, Mirza MR, Koskas M, Creutzberg CL (2018) Cancer of the corpus uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 143 Suppl 2:37-50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Nougaret S, Horta M, Sala E, Lakhman Y, Thomassin-Naggara I, Kido A, Masselli G, Bharwani N, Sadowski E, Ertmer A, Otero-Garcia M, Kubik-Huch RA, Cunha TM, Rockall A, Forstner R (2019) Endometrial Cancer MRI staging: Updated Guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Eur Radiol 29:792-805.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Faria SC, Sagebiel T, Balachandran A, Devine C, Lal C, Bhosale PR (2015) Imaging in endometrial carcinoma. Indian J Radiol Imaging 25:137-147.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Meissnitzer M, Forstner R (2016) MRI of endometrium cancer - how we do it. Cancer Imaging 16:11.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Jobo T, Sato R, Arai T, Tamura T, Watanabe J, Kuramoto H (2005) Lymph node pathway in the spread of endometrial carcinoma. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 26:167-169.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Stewart KI, Yates MS, Westin SN (2020) Pushing the envelope: expanding fertility sparing treatment of endometrial cancer. J Gynecol Oncol 31:e82.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Won S, Kim MK, Seong SJ (2020) Fertility-sparing treatment in women with endometrial cancer. Clin Exp Reprod Med 47:237-244.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank radiation oncologists Dr Jonathan Strauss and Dr Eric Donnelly in the Department of Radiation Oncology and pathologist Dr Jian-Jun Wei in the Department of Pathology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago, IL, and pathologist Dr Kruti Maniar from Northshore University Health Systems in Evanston, IL for their ideas regarding what radiation oncologists and pathologists want to know from radiologists at gynecologic oncology tumor board.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 676 N. St. Clair Street, Suite 800, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Hannah S. Recht & Jeanne M. Horowitz

  2. Department of Radiology, Michigan Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Kimberly L. Shampain

  3. Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA

    Marta N. Flory & Priyanka Jha

  4. Montpellier Cancer Institute, University of Montpellier, Monpellier, France

    Stephanie Nougaret

  5. IRCM, U1198, University of Montpellier, Monpellier, France

    Stephanie Nougaret

  6. Division of Gynecology Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Emma L. Barber

  7. Departments of Radiology and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Katherine E. Maturen

  8. Departments of Radiology and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA

    Elizabeth A. Sadowski

  9. Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    Atul B. Shinagare

  10. Department of Abdominal Imaging, Division of Diagnostic Imaging, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA

    Aradhana M. Venkatesan

Authors
  1. Hannah S. Recht
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kimberly L. Shampain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marta N. Flory
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephanie Nougaret
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Emma L. Barber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Priyanka Jha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Katherine E. Maturen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Elizabeth A. Sadowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Atul B. Shinagare
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Aradhana M. Venkatesan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Jeanne M. Horowitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hannah S. Recht.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Atul B Shingare: Related to work: None. Unrelated: Consultant, Virtualscopics and Imaging Endpoints. Aradhana M Venkatesan: Related to work: None, Unrelated: Grant support from Siemens Healthineers and support (Honorarium) from Elsevier. No other author disclosures.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Recht, H.S., Shampain, K.L., Flory, M.N. et al. Gynecologic oncology tumor board: the central role of the radiologist. Abdom Radiol 48, 3265–3279 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-023-03978-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-023-03978-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation