Next Article in Journal
When Cancer Hits the Streets
Previous Article in Journal
Treatment and Outcomes for Glioblastoma in Elderly Compared with Non-elderly Patients: A Population-Based Study
 
 
Current Oncology is published by MDPI from Volume 28 Issue 1 (2021). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with Multimed Inc..
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Contextualizing the Use of Oncologic Imaging within Treatment Phases: Imaging Trends and Modality Preferences, 2000–2014

by
T.P. Copeland
1,*,
J.M. Creasman
2,
D.J. Seidenwurm
3 and
B.L. Franc
1
1
Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Box 0946, 185 Berry Street B North, Room 350, San Francisco, CA, USA
2
Clinical and Translational Science Institute, University of California–San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
3
Sutter Medical Group, Sacramento, CA, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Curr. Oncol. 2017, 24(2), 99-105; https://doi.org/10.3747/co.24.3216
Submission received: 7 January 2017 / Revised: 5 February 2017 / Accepted: 3 March 2017 / Published: 1 April 2017

Abstract

Background: In the present study, we retrospectively evaluated the use of tomographic imaging in adult cancer patients to clarify how recent growth plateaus in the use of tomographic imaging in the United States might have affected oncologic imaging during the same period. Methods: At a U.S. academic cancer centre, 12,059 patients with dates of death from January 2000 through December 2014 were identified. Imaging was restricted to brain and body computed tomography (ct), brain and body magnetic resonance (mr), and body positron-emission tomography (pet) with and without superimposed ct. Trends during the staging (1 year after diagnosis), monitoring (18–6 months before death), and end-of-life (final 6 months before death) phases were analyzed. Results: Comparing the 2005–2009 with the 2010–2014 period, mean intensity of pet imaging increased 21% during staging (p = 0.0000) and 27% during end of life (p = 0.0019). In the monitoring phase, mean intensity for ct brain, ct body, and mr body imaging decreased by 26% (p = 0.0133), 11% (p = 0.0118), and 26% (p = 0.0008), respectively. Aggregate mean intensity of imaging increased in the 13%–27% range every 3 months from 18 months before death to death, reaching 1.43 images in the final 3 months of life. Patients diagnosed in the final 18 months of life had an average of 1 additional image during both the 3 months after diagnosis (p = 0.0000) and the final 3 months before death (p = 0.0000). Conclusions: Imaging increased as temporal proximity to death decreased, and patients diagnosed near death received more staging imaging, suggesting that imaging guidelines should consider imaging intensity within the context of treatment phase. Despite the development, by multiple organizations, of appropriateness criteria to reduce imaging utilization, aggregate per-patient imaging showed insignificant changes. Simultaneous fluctuations in the intensity of imaging by modality suggest recent changes in the modalities preferred by providers.
Keywords: radiology; tomographic imaging; oncologic imaging; imaging trends; staging; end of life; evidence-based practice; imaging guidelines radiology; tomographic imaging; oncologic imaging; imaging trends; staging; end of life; evidence-based practice; imaging guidelines

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Copeland, T.P.; Creasman, J.M.; Seidenwurm, D.J.; Franc, B.L. Contextualizing the Use of Oncologic Imaging within Treatment Phases: Imaging Trends and Modality Preferences, 2000–2014. Curr. Oncol. 2017, 24, 99-105. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.24.3216

AMA Style

Copeland TP, Creasman JM, Seidenwurm DJ, Franc BL. Contextualizing the Use of Oncologic Imaging within Treatment Phases: Imaging Trends and Modality Preferences, 2000–2014. Current Oncology. 2017; 24(2):99-105. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.24.3216

Chicago/Turabian Style

Copeland, T.P., J.M. Creasman, D.J. Seidenwurm, and B.L. Franc. 2017. "Contextualizing the Use of Oncologic Imaging within Treatment Phases: Imaging Trends and Modality Preferences, 2000–2014" Current Oncology 24, no. 2: 99-105. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.24.3216

APA Style

Copeland, T. P., Creasman, J. M., Seidenwurm, D. J., & Franc, B. L. (2017). Contextualizing the Use of Oncologic Imaging within Treatment Phases: Imaging Trends and Modality Preferences, 2000–2014. Current Oncology, 24(2), 99-105. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.24.3216

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop