Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 9/2022

Open Access 24-03-2022 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Magnetic Resonance

Interobserver agreement and prognostic impact for MRI–based 2018 FIGO staging parameters in uterine cervical cancer

Authors: Kari S. Wagner-Larsen, Njål Lura, Øyvind Salvesen, Mari Kyllesø Halle, David Forsse, Jone Trovik, Noeska Smit, Camilla Krakstad, Ingfrid S. Haldorsen

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 9/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the interobserver agreement for MRI–based 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging parameters in patients with cervical cancer and assess the prognostic value of these MRI parameters in relation to other clinicopathological markers.

Methods

This retrospective study included 416 women with histologically confirmed cervical cancer who underwent pretreatment pelvic MRI from May 2002 to December 2017. Three radiologists independently recorded MRI–derived staging parameters incorporated in the 2018 FIGO staging system. Kappa coefficients (κ) for interobserver agreement were calculated. The predictive and prognostic values of the MRI parameters were explored using ROC analyses and Kaplan–Meier with log-rank tests, and analyzed in relation to clinicopathological patient characteristics.

Results

Overall agreement was substantial for the staging parameters: tumor size > 2 cm (κ = 0.80), tumor size > 4 cm (κ = 0.76), tumor size categories (≤ 2 cm; > 2 and ≤ 4 cm; > 4 cm) (κ = 0.78), parametrial invasion (κ = 0.63), vaginal invasion (κ = 0.61), and enlarged lymph nodes (κ = 0.63). Higher MRI–derived tumor size category (≤ 2 cm; > 2 and ≤ 4 cm; > 4 cm) was associated with a stepwise reduction in survival (p ≤ 0.001 for all). Tumor size > 4 cm and parametrial invasion at MRI were associated with aggressive clinicopathological features, and the incorporation of these MRI–based staging parameters improved risk stratification when compared to corresponding clinical assessments alone.

Conclusion

The interobserver agreement for central MRI–derived 2018 FIGO staging parameters was substantial. MRI improved the identification of patients with aggressive clinicopathological features and poor survival, demonstrating the potential impact of MRI enabling better prognostication and treatment tailoring in cervical cancer.

Key Points

• The overall interobserver agreement was substantial (κ values 0.61–0.80) for central MRI staging parameters in the 2018 FIGO system.
• Higher MRI–derived tumor size category was linked to a stepwise reduction in survival (p ≤ 0.001 for all).
• MRI–derived tumor size > 4 cm and parametrial invasion were associated with aggressive clinicopathological features, and the incorporation of these MRI–derived staging parameters improved risk stratification when compared to clinical assessments alone.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Bhatla N, Aoki D, Sharma DN, Sankaranarayanan R (2018) Cancer of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 143(Suppl 2):22–36CrossRef Bhatla N, Aoki D, Sharma DN, Sankaranarayanan R (2018) Cancer of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 143(Suppl 2):22–36CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Pecorelli S (2009) Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 105:103–104CrossRef Pecorelli S (2009) Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 105:103–104CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Koh WJ, Abu-Rustum NR, Bean S et al (2019) Cervical cancer, Version 3.2019, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 17:64–84CrossRef Koh WJ, Abu-Rustum NR, Bean S et al (2019) Cervical cancer, Version 3.2019, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 17:64–84CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Berek JS, Matsuo K, Grubbs BH et al (2019) Multidisciplinary perspectives on newly revised 2018 FIGO staging of cancer of the cervix uteri. J Gynecol Oncol 30:e40CrossRef Berek JS, Matsuo K, Grubbs BH et al (2019) Multidisciplinary perspectives on newly revised 2018 FIGO staging of cancer of the cervix uteri. J Gynecol Oncol 30:e40CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Wright JD, Matsuo K, Huang Y et al (2019) Prognostic performance of the 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics cervical cancer staging guidelines. Obstet Gynecol 134:49–57CrossRef Wright JD, Matsuo K, Huang Y et al (2019) Prognostic performance of the 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics cervical cancer staging guidelines. Obstet Gynecol 134:49–57CrossRef
7.
go back to reference de Gregorio A, Widschwendter P, Ebner F et al (2020) Influence of the new FIGO classification for cervical cancer on patient survival: a retrospective analysis of 265 histologically confirmed cases with FIGO stages IA to IIB. Oncology 98:91–97CrossRef de Gregorio A, Widschwendter P, Ebner F et al (2020) Influence of the new FIGO classification for cervical cancer on patient survival: a retrospective analysis of 265 histologically confirmed cases with FIGO stages IA to IIB. Oncology 98:91–97CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Matsuo K, Machida H, Mandelbaum RS, Konishi I, Mikami M (2019) Validation of the 2018 FIGO cervical cancer staging system. Gynecol Oncol 152:87–93CrossRef Matsuo K, Machida H, Mandelbaum RS, Konishi I, Mikami M (2019) Validation of the 2018 FIGO cervical cancer staging system. Gynecol Oncol 152:87–93CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Wagner AE, Pappas L, Ghia AJ, Gaffney DK (2013) Impact of tumor size on survival in cancer of the cervix and validation of stage IIA1 and IIA2 subdivisions. Gynecol Oncol 129:517–521CrossRef Wagner AE, Pappas L, Ghia AJ, Gaffney DK (2013) Impact of tumor size on survival in cancer of the cervix and validation of stage IIA1 and IIA2 subdivisions. Gynecol Oncol 129:517–521CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Lee JH, Lee SW, Kim JR et al (2017) Tumour size, volume, and marker expression during radiation therapy can predict survival of cervical cancer patients: a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of KROG 16-01. Gynecol Oncol 147:577–584CrossRef Lee JH, Lee SW, Kim JR et al (2017) Tumour size, volume, and marker expression during radiation therapy can predict survival of cervical cancer patients: a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of KROG 16-01. Gynecol Oncol 147:577–584CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Frumovitz M, Sun CC, Schmeler KM et al (2009) Parametrial involvement in radical hysterectomy specimens for women with early-stage cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 114:93–99CrossRef Frumovitz M, Sun CC, Schmeler KM et al (2009) Parametrial involvement in radical hysterectomy specimens for women with early-stage cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 114:93–99CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Canaz E, Ozyurek ES, Erdem B et al (2017) Preoperatively assessable clinical and pathological risk factors for parametrial involvement in surgically treated FIGO stage IB-IIA cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 27:1722–1728CrossRef Canaz E, Ozyurek ES, Erdem B et al (2017) Preoperatively assessable clinical and pathological risk factors for parametrial involvement in surgically treated FIGO stage IB-IIA cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 27:1722–1728CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Koyama T, Tamai K, Togashi K (2007) Staging of carcinoma of the uterine cervix and endometrium. Eur Radiol 17:2009–2019CrossRef Koyama T, Tamai K, Togashi K (2007) Staging of carcinoma of the uterine cervix and endometrium. Eur Radiol 17:2009–2019CrossRef
14.
15.
go back to reference Cibula D, Pötter R, Planchamp F et al (2018) The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Society of Pathology guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol 127:404–416CrossRef Cibula D, Pötter R, Planchamp F et al (2018) The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Society of Pathology guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol 127:404–416CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Thomeer MG, Gerestein C, Spronk S, van Doorn HC, van der Ham E, Hunink MG (2013) Clinical examination versus magnetic resonance imaging in the pretreatment staging of cervical carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 23:2005–2018CrossRef Thomeer MG, Gerestein C, Spronk S, van Doorn HC, van der Ham E, Hunink MG (2013) Clinical examination versus magnetic resonance imaging in the pretreatment staging of cervical carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 23:2005–2018CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Woo S, Suh CH, Kim SY, Cho JY, Kim SH (2018) Magnetic resonance imaging for detection of parametrial invasion in cervical cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature between 2012 and 2016. Eur Radiol 28:530–541CrossRef Woo S, Suh CH, Kim SY, Cho JY, Kim SH (2018) Magnetic resonance imaging for detection of parametrial invasion in cervical cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature between 2012 and 2016. Eur Radiol 28:530–541CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Zhang W, Zhang J, Yang J et al (2014) The role of magnetic resonance imaging in pretreatment evaluation of early-stage cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 24:1292–1298CrossRef Zhang W, Zhang J, Yang J et al (2014) The role of magnetic resonance imaging in pretreatment evaluation of early-stage cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 24:1292–1298CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Bourgioti C, Chatoupis K, Rodolakis A et al (2016) Incremental prognostic value of MRI in the staging of early cervical cancer: a prospective study and review of the literature. Clin Imaging 40:72–78CrossRef Bourgioti C, Chatoupis K, Rodolakis A et al (2016) Incremental prognostic value of MRI in the staging of early cervical cancer: a prospective study and review of the literature. Clin Imaging 40:72–78CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Salvo G, Odetto D, Saez Perrotta MC et al (2020) Measurement of tumor size in early cervical cancer: an ever-evolving paradigm. Int J Gynecol Cancer 30:1215–1223CrossRef Salvo G, Odetto D, Saez Perrotta MC et al (2020) Measurement of tumor size in early cervical cancer: an ever-evolving paradigm. Int J Gynecol Cancer 30:1215–1223CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Coakley F et al (2009) Early invasive cervical cancer: MRI and CT predictors of lymphatic metastases in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 intergroup study. Gynecol Oncol 112:95–103CrossRef Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Coakley F et al (2009) Early invasive cervical cancer: MRI and CT predictors of lymphatic metastases in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 intergroup study. Gynecol Oncol 112:95–103CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Qu JR, Qin L, Li X et al (2018) Predicting parametrial invasion in cervical carcinoma (stages IB1, IB2, and IIA): diagnostic accuracy of T2-weighted imaging combined with DWI at 3 T. AJR Am J Roentgenol 210:677–684CrossRef Qu JR, Qin L, Li X et al (2018) Predicting parametrial invasion in cervical carcinoma (stages IB1, IB2, and IIA): diagnostic accuracy of T2-weighted imaging combined with DWI at 3 T. AJR Am J Roentgenol 210:677–684CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Shin YR, Rha SE, Choi BG, Oh SN, Park MY, Byun JY (2013) Uterine cervical carcinoma: a comparison of two- and three-dimensional T2-weighted turbo spin-echo MR imaging at 3.0 T for image quality and local-regional staging. Eur Radiol 23:1150–1157CrossRef Shin YR, Rha SE, Choi BG, Oh SN, Park MY, Byun JY (2013) Uterine cervical carcinoma: a comparison of two- and three-dimensional T2-weighted turbo spin-echo MR imaging at 3.0 T for image quality and local-regional staging. Eur Radiol 23:1150–1157CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Park JJ, Kim CK, Park SY, Park BK (2015) Parametrial invasion in cervical cancer: fused T2-weighted imaging and high-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging with background body signal suppression at 3 T. Radiology 274:734–741CrossRef Park JJ, Kim CK, Park SY, Park BK (2015) Parametrial invasion in cervical cancer: fused T2-weighted imaging and high-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging with background body signal suppression at 3 T. Radiology 274:734–741CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Bhatla N, Berek JS, Cuello Fredes M et al (2019) Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 145:129–135CrossRef Bhatla N, Berek JS, Cuello Fredes M et al (2019) Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 145:129–135CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Balcacer P, Shergill A, Litkouhi B (2019) MRI of cervical cancer with a surgical perspective: staging, prognostic implications and pitfalls. Abdom Radiol (NY) 44:2557–2571CrossRef Balcacer P, Shergill A, Litkouhi B (2019) MRI of cervical cancer with a surgical perspective: staging, prognostic implications and pitfalls. Abdom Radiol (NY) 44:2557–2571CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRef Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Blanche P, Dartigues JF, Jacqmin-Gadda H (2013) Estimating and comparing time-dependent areas under receiver operating characteristic curves for censored event times with competing risks. Stat Med 32:5381–5397CrossRef Blanche P, Dartigues JF, Jacqmin-Gadda H (2013) Estimating and comparing time-dependent areas under receiver operating characteristic curves for censored event times with competing risks. Stat Med 32:5381–5397CrossRef
29.
go back to reference R Core Team (2020) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria R Core Team (2020) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria
30.
go back to reference Bankier AA, Levine D, Halpern EF, Kressel HY (2010) Consensus interpretation in imaging research: is there a better way? Radiology 257:14–17CrossRef Bankier AA, Levine D, Halpern EF, Kressel HY (2010) Consensus interpretation in imaging research: is there a better way? Radiology 257:14–17CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Mower WR (1999) Evaluating bias and variability in diagnostic test reports. Ann Emerg Med 33:85–91CrossRef Mower WR (1999) Evaluating bias and variability in diagnostic test reports. Ann Emerg Med 33:85–91CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Tummers P, Gerestein K, Mens JW, Verstraelen H, van Doorn H (2013) Interobserver variability of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging in cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 23:890–894CrossRef Tummers P, Gerestein K, Mens JW, Verstraelen H, van Doorn H (2013) Interobserver variability of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging in cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 23:890–894CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Singh AK, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, Herzog TJ, Siegel BA (2003) FDG-PET lymph node staging and survival of patients with FIGO stage IIIb cervical carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 56:489–493CrossRef Singh AK, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, Herzog TJ, Siegel BA (2003) FDG-PET lymph node staging and survival of patients with FIGO stage IIIb cervical carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 56:489–493CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Liu B, Gao S, Li S (2017) 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 82:209–222CrossRef Liu B, Gao S, Li S (2017) 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 82:209–222CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Haldorsen IS, Lura N, Blaakaer J, Fischerova D, Werner HMJ (2019) What is the role of imaging at primary diagnostic work-up in uterine cervical cancer? Curr Oncol Rep 21:77CrossRef Haldorsen IS, Lura N, Blaakaer J, Fischerova D, Werner HMJ (2019) What is the role of imaging at primary diagnostic work-up in uterine cervical cancer? Curr Oncol Rep 21:77CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Interobserver agreement and prognostic impact for MRI–based 2018 FIGO staging parameters in uterine cervical cancer
Authors
Kari S. Wagner-Larsen
Njål Lura
Øyvind Salvesen
Mari Kyllesø Halle
David Forsse
Jone Trovik
Noeska Smit
Camilla Krakstad
Ingfrid S. Haldorsen
Publication date
24-03-2022
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 9/2022
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08666-x

Other articles of this Issue 9/2022

European Radiology 9/2022 Go to the issue