Skip to content
2000
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Current Medical Imaging
  4. Volume 20, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 20, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1573-4056
  • E-ISSN: 1875-6603
file format pdf download PDF
side by side viewer icon HTML

Abstract

Objective

The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in staging and treatment of cervical cancer in pregnancy, and to evaluate the benefit of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) during neoadjuvant chemotherapy management.

Materials and Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study. Patients were divided into two groups according to the stage of cervical cancer. The mean term of pregnancy at the time of the diagnosis was the early second trimester (range 10-27 weeks) and the median age was 33 years (range 26-40 years). The abdominal and pelvic MRI images and clinical data of these patients were reviewed. Tumor size, local tumor spread, and nodal involvement were evaluated using an MRI dataset. The treatment and follow-up imaging were analyzed as well, and the ADC was measured before and after the chemotherapy.

Results

16 patients with histopathologically confirmed cervical cancer during pregnancy were retrospectively enrolled. 7 patients were diagnosed with local cervical cancer (FIGO stage IAI) and designated as early stage group, as the lesion was invisible on MRI. In this group, pregnancies were allowed to continue until cesarean delivery (CD) at 38-41 weeks. The other 9 patients presenting with local or extensive cervical cancer (FIGO stage IB2-IIA2) were designated as the advanced-stage group. The lesion could be measured and analyzed on MRI. They were treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in pregnancy. Among them, 6 patients underwent TP regimen (paclitaxel 135~175 mg/m2 plus cisplatin 70~75 mg/m2), while 3 patients received TC regimen (paclitaxel 135~175 mg/m2 plus carboplatin AUC=5). NACT was performed for 1 to 2 courses before surgery. ADC demonstrated significant differences before and after chemotherapy administered during pregnancy (1.06 ± 0.12 sec/mm2 . 1.34 ± 0.21 sec/mm2).

Conclusion

MRI has been found to be helpful in staging cervical cancer in pregnancy. Patients with stage IA confirmed by MRI can choose conservative treatment and continue the pregnancy until term birth. MRI can dynamically monitor the efficacy of chemotherapy for patients with stage IB and above during pregnancy. ADC value can have a potential role in the evaluation of chemotherapy efficacy.

© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Bentham Science Publisher.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0), a copy of which is available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/0115734056257220231107114540
2024-01-01
2025-06-16

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/cmir/10.2174/0115734056257220231107114540
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
The full text of this item is not currently available.

References

  1. CordeiroC.N. GemignaniM.L. Gynecologic malignancies in pregnancy: Balancing fetal risks with oncologic safety.Obstet. Gynecol. Surv.201772318419310.1097/OGX.000000000000040728304416
     [Google Scholar]
  2. KalampokasE. VlahosN. KalampokasT. GurumurthyM. Common malignancies during pregnancy: A comprehensive review.Cancer Diag Prog20211310310910.21873/cdp.1001535399318
     [Google Scholar]
  3. de HaanJ. VerheeckeM. Van CalsterenK. Van CalsterB. ShmakovR.G. Mhallem GziriM. HalaskaM.J. FruscioR. LokC.A.R. BoereI.A. ZolaP. OttevangerP.B. de GrootC.J.M. PeccatoriF.A. Dahl SteffensenK. CardonickE.H. PolushkinaE. RobL. CeppiL. SukhikhG.T. HanS.N. AmantF. Oncological management and obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women diagnosed with cancer during pregnancy: A 20-year international cohort study of 1170 patients.Lancet Oncol.201819333734610.1016/S1470‑2045(18)30059‑729395867
     [Google Scholar]
  4. OliveiraA.F. SouzaL.R.M.F. PaschoiniM.C. MurtaE.F.C. NomeliniR.S. Chemotherapy for cervical cancer in pregnancy.J. Obstet. Gynaecol.201939342542610.1080/01443615.2018.147418730286666
     [Google Scholar]
  5. IlancheranA. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in cervical cancer in pregnancy.Best Pract. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol.20163310210710.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.10.00826536815
     [Google Scholar]
  6. JiangY. ZhaoJ. DingL. LiJ. WangS. Clinical pathological analysis of newly diagnosed malignant pelvic tumors during pregnancy.Transl. Cancer Res.20211062977298410.21037/tcr‑21‑71735116605
     [Google Scholar]
  7. PerroneA.M. BovicelliA. D’AndrilliG. BorgheseG. GiordanoA. De IacoP. Cervical cancer in pregnancy: Analysis of the literature and innovative approaches.J. Cell. Physiol.20192349149751499010.1002/jcp.2834030790275
     [Google Scholar]
  8. GungordukK. SahbazA. OzdemirA. GokcuM. SancıM. KöseM.F. Management of cervical cancer during pregnancy.J. Obstet. Gynaecol.201636336637110.3109/01443615.2015.106523526467977
     [Google Scholar]
  9. SongY. LiuY. LinM. ShengB. ZhuX. Efficacy of neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy during the second and third trimester of pregnancy in women with cervical cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Drug Des. Devel. Ther.2018137910210.2147/DDDT.S18696630587930
     [Google Scholar]
  10. KongT.W. LeeE.J. LeeY. ChangS.J. SonJ.H. RyuH.S. Neoadjuvant and postoperative chemotherapy with paclitaxel plus cisplatin for the treatment of FIGO stage IB cervical cancer in pregnancy.Obstet. Gynecol. Sci.201457653954310.5468/ogs.2014.57.6.53925469346
     [Google Scholar]
  11. ChunK.C. KimD.Y. KimJ.H. KimY.M. KimY.T. NamJ.H. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with paclitaxel plus platinum followed by radical surgery in early cervical cancer during pregnancy: Three case reports.Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol.201040769469810.1093/jjco/hyq03920427545
     [Google Scholar]
  12. BalleyguierC. SalaE. Da CunhaT. BergmanA. BrkljacicB. DanzaF. ForstnerR. HammB. Kubik-HuchR. LopezC. ManfrediR. McHugoJ. OleagaL. TogashiK. KinkelK. Staging of uterine cervical cancer with MRI: Guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology.Eur. Radiol.20112151102111010.1007/s00330‑010‑1998‑x21063710
     [Google Scholar]
  13. RauchG.M. KaurH. ChoiH. ErnstR.D. KloppA.H. BoonsirikamchaiP. WestinS.N. MarcalL.P. Optimization of MR imaging for pretreatment evaluation of patients with endometrial and cervical cancer.Radiographics20143441082109810.1148/rg.34414000125019443
     [Google Scholar]
  14. LiuB. GaoS. LiS. A comprehensive comparison of CT, MRI, positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/CT, and Diffusion Weighted Imaging-MRI for detecting the lymph nodes metastases in patients with cervical cancer: A meta-analysis based on 67 studies.Gynecol. Obstet. Invest.201782320922210.1159/00045600628183074
     [Google Scholar]
  15. YoshidaS. TakaharaT. KweeT.C. WasedaY. KobayashiS. FujiiY. DWI as an imaging biomarker for bladder cancer.AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.201720861218122810.2214/AJR.17.1779828245143
     [Google Scholar]
  16. PadhaniA.R. LiuG. Mu-KohD. ChenevertT.L. ThoenyH.C. TakaharaT. Dzik-JuraszA. RossB.D. Van CauterenM. CollinsD. HammoudD.A. RustinG.J.S. TaouliB. ChoykeP.L. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: Consensus and recommendations.Neoplasia200911210212510.1593/neo.8132819186405
     [Google Scholar]
  17. SteccoA. BuemiF. CassaràA. MatheoudR. SacchettiG.M. ArnulfoA. BrambillaM. CarrieroA. Comparison of retrospective PET and MRI-DWI (PET/MRI-DWI) image fusion with PET/CT and MRI-DWI in detection of cervical and endometrial cancer lymph node metastases.Radiol. Med.2016121753754510.1007/s11547‑016‑0626‑527033474
     [Google Scholar]
  18. WuL. LiJ. FuC. KühnB. WangX. Chemotherapy response of pancreatic cancer by diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and intravoxel incoherent motion DWI (IVIM-DWI) in an orthotopic mouse model.MAGMA201932450150910.1007/s10334‑019‑00745‑330825012
     [Google Scholar]
  19. BalleyguierC. FournetC. Ben HassenW. ZareskiE. MoriceP. Haie-MederC. UzanC. GouyS. DuvillardP. LhomméC. Management of cervical cancer detected during pregnancy: Role of magnetic resonance imaging.Clin. Imaging2013371707610.1016/j.clinimag.2012.04.00423206610
     [Google Scholar]
  20. NoëlP. DubéM. PlanteM. St-LaurentG. Early cervical carcinoma and fertility-sparing treatment options: MR imaging as a tool in patient selection and a follow-up modality.Radiographics20143441099111910.1148/rg.34413000925019444
     [Google Scholar]
  21. HanS.N. VerheeckeM. VandenbrouckeT. Mhallem GziriM. Van CalsterenK. AmantF. Management of gynecological cancers during pregnancy.Curr. Oncol. Rep.2014161241510.1007/s11912‑014‑0415‑z25344340
     [Google Scholar]
  22. MoriceP. UzanC. GouyS. VerschraegenC. Haie-MederC. Gynaecological cancers in pregnancy.Lancet2012379981555856910.1016/S0140‑6736(11)60829‑522325661
     [Google Scholar]
  23. De VincenzoR. TortorellaL. RicciC. CavaliereA.F. ZannoniG.F. CefaloM.G. ScambiaG. FagottiA. Locally advanced cervical cancer complicating pregnancy: A case of competing risks from the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Rome.Gynecol. Oncol.2018150339840510.1016/j.ygyno.2018.06.02830126588
     [Google Scholar]
  24. KayahashiK. MizumotoY. MyojoS. MitaniY. TajimaA. FujiwaraH. A successful case of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical hysterectomy during pregnancy for advanced uterine cervical cancer accompanied by neonatal erythroderma.J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res.201844102003200710.1111/jog.1374630043438
     [Google Scholar]
  25. BigelowCA HorowitzNS GoodmanA GrowdonWB Del CarmenM KaimalAJ Management and outcome of cervical cancer diagnosed in pregnancy.Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.2017216327127610.1016/j.ajog.2016.10.034
     [Google Scholar]
  26. RicciC. ScambiaG. De VincenzoR. Locally advanced cervical cancer in pregnancy: Overcoming the challenge. A case series and review of the literature.Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer20162681490149610.1097/IGC.000000000000079527575627
     [Google Scholar]
  27. AmantF. HalaskaM.J. FumagalliM. Dahl SteffensenK. LokC. Van CalsterenK. HanS.N. MirO. FruscioR. UzanC. MaxwellC. DekremJ. StrauvenG. Mhallem GziriM. KesicV. BerveillerP. van den HeuvelF. OttevangerP.B. VergoteI. LishnerM. MoriceP. NulmanI. Gynecologic cancers in pregnancy: Guidelines of a second international consensus meeting.Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer201424339440310.1097/IGC.000000000000006224445819
     [Google Scholar]
  28. ZagouriF. KorakitiA.M. ZakopoulouR. KyriazoglouA. ZografosE. HaidopoulosD. ApostolidouK. PapatheodoridiM.A. DimopoulosM.A. Taxanes during pregnancy in cervical cancer: A systematic review and pooled analysis.Cancer Treat. Rev.20197910188510.1016/j.ctrv.2019.08.00131442939
     [Google Scholar]
  29. SalibM.Y. RussellJ.H.B. StewartV.R. SudderuddinS.A. BarwickT.D. RockallA.G. BharwaniN. 2018 FIGO staging classification for cervical cancer: Added benefits of imaging.Radiographics20204061807182210.1148/rg.202020001332946322
     [Google Scholar]
  30. DhandaS. ThakurM. KerkarR. JagmohanP. Diffusion-weighted imaging of gynecologic tumors: Diagnostic pearls and potential pitfalls.Radiographics20143451393141610.1148/rg.34513013125208287
     [Google Scholar]
  31. KidoA. NakamotoY. Implications of the new FIGO staging and the role of imaging in cervical cancer.Br. J. Radiol.20219411252020134210.1259/bjr.2020134233989030
     [Google Scholar]
  32. JuF.J. Evaluation of the efficacy of chemoradiotherapy in cervical cancer using diffusion-weighted imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient.OncoTargets Ther.201697555756110.2147/OTT.S11182928008273
     [Google Scholar]
  33. ChoiS.Y. ChangY-W. ParkH.J. KimH.J. HongS.S. SeoD.Y. Correlation of the apparent diffusion coefficiency values on diffusion-weighted imaging with prognostic factors for breast cancer.Br. J. Radiol.2012851016e474e47910.1259/bjr/7938146422128125
     [Google Scholar]
  34. GuoY. CaiY.Q. CaiZ.L. GaoY.G. AnN.Y. MaL. MahankaliS. GaoJ.H. Differentiation of clinically benign and malignant breast lesions using diffusion-weighted imaging.J. Magn. Reson. Imaging200216217217810.1002/jmri.1014012203765
     [Google Scholar]
  35. YoshiharaK. IshiguroT. ChiharaM. ShimaE. AdachiS. IsobeM. HainoK. YamaguchiM. SekineM. KashimaK. TakakuwaK. NishikawaN. EnomotoT. The safety and effectiveness of abdominal radical trachelectomy for early-stage cervical cancer during pregnancy.Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer201828478278710.1097/IGC.000000000000121829498982
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/0115734056257220231107114540
Loading
MRI Plain Scan: A Tool in the Management of Cervical Cancer during Pregnancy
Curr. Med. Imaging 20, e15734056257220 (2024); https://doi.org/10.2174/0115734056257220231107114540
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/0115734056257220231107114540
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/0115734056257220231107114540
Loading

Data & Media loading...


  • Article Type:     Research Article
Keyword(s): Cervical cancer; Chemotherapy; DWI; Magnetic resonance imaging; Pregnancy; Staging

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test