Ozsoy O, Fioretta G, Ares C, et al.. Incidental detection of synchronous primary tumours during staging workup for prostate cancer

Radiation Oncology Service, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Schweizerische medizinische Wochenschrift (Impact Factor: 2.09). 04/2010; 140(15-16):233-6.
Source: PubMed


To assess the prevalence of incidental synchronous primary cancers discovered by abdominal CT scan among prostate cancer patients.
Patients with prostate cancer in Geneva, Switzerland, were retrospectively analysed regarding incidental diagnosis of synchronous second primary malignancies, including a cohort of 398 patients treated from 1991 through 2001 with radical radiotherapy (RT) and a second cohort of 419 patients treated from 1991 through 2001 by radical prostatectomy (RP) in order to analyse the differences between RT and RP patients. Both cohorts were evaluated regarding incidence of synchronous second primary cancers, compared with that expected in the general population (Standardized Incidence Ratio, SIR). The influence of staging workup on the diagnosis of incidental primary malignancies was studied.
Six synchronous cancers (4 renal, 1 pancreatic, 1 rectal) were observed on abdomino-pelvic CT-scan among 480 patients (398 RT patients and 82 RP patients) (1.2%), who had been subjected to staging workup. For renal-cell carcinomas (RCC) in 398 RT patients (RCC) SIR was 18.19 (CI [Confidence Interval] 4.96-46.57), (p <0.001). After exclusion of 12 patients from RP cohort (n:419) in whom the prostate cancer was an incidental finding during surgery for bladder cancer (SIR 33.50 [CI 17.83-57.28]), (p <0.001), 407 patients were observed. There was no synchronous RCC among 325 RP patients who had no CT-scan.
In patients with prostate cancer, abdominopelvic CT staging detects incidental second primary cancers (mostly commonly RCC) with a greater frequency than that expected.

Download full-text


Available from: Carmen Ares
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this article is to evaluate the frequency and clinical relevance of incidental findings in patients with prostate cancer who underwent abdominopelvic contrast-enhanced CT examination for initial staging workup. We retrospectively reviewed 355 initial staging abdominopelvic contrast-enhanced CT examinations conducted from January 2000 to December 2010 in patients with prostate cancer for incidental findings that were not related to prostate cancer. A finding was judged to be potentially significant if therapeutic intervention, additional imaging, or tissue sampling was deemed advisable. The rate of incidental findings was correlated to patients' age and stratified prostate cancer risk groups. We found 779 incidental finding in 292 patients (82.3%), of which 75 findings in 73 patients (20.6%) were potentially significant. Indeterminate masses were the most prevalent significant finding (n = 62). Synchronous malignancy was detected in 21 patients (5.9%). Kidney cancer (n = 7 [1.97%]) was the most common malignancy, followed by lymphoma (n = 4 [1.13%]). Staging of the cancers revealed that 15 patients, including all of those with renal cancer, had N0M0 disease. Significant vascular abnormalities were reported in six cases. Additionally, significant findings, synchronous malignancies in particular, were identified at a higher rate in patients older than 65 years. However, no significant differences were noticed between the different prostate cancer risk groups. Abdominal contrast-enhanced CT for initial staging of prostate cancer shows a considerable prevalence of incidental vascular events and synchronous cancers, with kidney cancers being the most common. Notably, 71.5% of these malignancies were at early stage. Our results show an incremental value of CT in prostate cancer staging, with an emphasis on focused evaluation of the kidneys.
    No preview · Article · Dec 2012 · American Journal of Roentgenology
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:: Administrative health care claims data are used for epidemiologic, health services, and outcomes cancer research and thus play a significant role in policy. Cancer stage, which is often a major driver of cost and clinical outcomes, is not typically included in claims data. OBJECTIVES:: Evaluate algorithms used in a dataset of cancer patients to identify patients with metastatic breast (BC), lung (LC), or colorectal (CRC) cancer using claims data. METHODS:: Clinical data on BC, LC, or CRC patients (between January 1, 2007 and March 31, 2010) were linked to a health care claims database. Inclusion required health plan enrollment ≥3 months before initial cancer diagnosis date. Algorithms were used in the claims database to identify patients' disease status, which was compared with physician-reported metastases. Generic and tumor-specific algorithms were evaluated using ICD-9 codes, varying diagnosis time frames, and including/excluding other tumors. Positive and negative predictive values, sensitivity, and specificity were assessed. RESULTS:: The linked databases included 14,480 patients; of whom, 32%, 17%, and 14.2% had metastatic BC, LC, and CRC, respectively, at diagnosis and met inclusion criteria. Nontumor-specific algorithms had lower specificity than tumor-specific algorithms. Tumor-specific algorithms' sensitivity and specificity were 53% and 99% for BC, 55% and 85% for LC, and 59% and 98% for CRC, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:: Algorithms to distinguish metastatic BC, LC, and CRC from locally advanced disease should use tumor-specific primary cancer codes with 2 claims for the specific primary cancer >30-42 days apart to reduce misclassification. These performed best overall in specificity, positive predictive values, and overall accuracy to identify metastatic cancer in a health care claims database.
    No preview · Article · Mar 2013 · Medical care
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In our centre, among 1965 registered cancer patients between May 2011 and December 2013, we report three cases with multiple primary malignant neoplasms. One of them was excluded due to lack of data, and so we present the remaining two cases. The first case is an 82-year-old female patient with colon and thyroid cancer and the second case is a 61-year-old female patient with colon and breast cancer. Both cases were metachronous and discovered accidently during the regular follow up, and managed with a curative intent. Conclusion: It is important for the clinicians to keep in mind that individuals with cancer are at increased risk for subsequent primary malignancies, which must be differentiated from recurrent or metastatic disease.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2014 · Forum of Clinical Oncology
Show more