-radiation chemotherapy ( consider collecting stem cells before craniospinal radiation ).” AMED-3 Follow-up: The imaging recommendations changed to “Brain MRI every 3 mos and spine MRI every 6 mos for 2 y; then brain MRI every 6 months and spine MRI every
Search Results
Robert J. Motzer, Eric Jonasch, Neeraj Agarwal, Clair Beard, Sam Bhayani, Graeme B. Bolger, Sam S. Chang, Toni K. Choueiri, Brian A. Costello, Ithaar H. Derweesh, Shilpa Gupta, Steven L. Hancock, Jenny J. Kim, Timothy M. Kuzel, Elaine T. Lam, Clayton Lau, Ellis G. Levine, Daniel W. Lin, M. Dror Michaelson, Thomas Olencki, Roberto Pili, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Edward N. Rampersaud, Bruce G. Redman, Charles J. Ryan, Joel Sheinfeld, Brian Shuch, Kanishka Sircar, Brad Somer, Richard B. Wilder, Mary Dwyer, and Rashmi Kumar
growth rate of the tumor, the panel recommends abdominal imaging (with CT or MRI) within 6 months from initiation of active surveillance, and subsequent imaging (with CT, MRI, or ultrasound) may be performed annually thereafter. All 3 modalities
, HCC-A) HCC-3 • Workup: Multidisciplinary evaluation: ➤ 9th bullet was revised: “Abdominal/pelvic CT or MRI with contrast, if not previously done or needs updating .” ➤ New 10th bullet was added: “Consider referral to a hepatologist
Mary K. Hayes, Mayra Frau, Erica Bloomquist, and Heather Wright
successful LN excision without complication. The mean time interval between WFL and surgery was 162 days (range 4-270, median 191 days). A single supplementary wire was performed for surgeon’s learning curve. No obscuring artifact was noted in 25 MRI exams
Adam C. Powell, Christopher T Lugo, Jeremy T Pickerell, James W Long, Amin J Mirhadi, and Bryan A Loy
(Black, White, Other) and order determination, controlling for age, the urbanicity and median income of the patient’s ZIP code, and whether the patient had breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) prior to the RT order. Results : We identified 3
Dadasaheb Akolkar, Darshana Patil, Anantbhushan Ranade, Revati Patil, Sachin Apurwa, Sanket Patil, Pradip Fulmali, Pradip Devhare, Navin Srivastava, Ajay Srinivasan, and Rajan Datar
integrated to generate patient-specific therapy recommendations. All patients underwent whole body PET-CT and brain MRI scans prior to start of treatment. Treatment response was determined from follow-up PET-CT scans and used to calculate Objective Response
Therese B. Bevers, Benjamin O. Anderson, Ermelinda Bonaccio, Sandra Buys, Mary B. Daly, Peter J. Dempsey, William B. Farrar, Irving Fleming, Judy E. Garber, Randall E. Harris, Alexandra S. Heerdt, Mark Helvie, John G. Huff, Nazanin Khakpour, Seema A. Khan, Helen Krontiras, Gary Lyman, Elizabeth Rafferty, Sara Shaw, Mary Lou Smith, Theodore N. Tsangaris, Cheryl Williams, and Thomas Yankeelov
with her breasts), physical examination, risk assessment, screening mammography, and, in selected cases, screening MRI. A diagnostic breast evaluation differs from breast screening in that it is used to evaluate an existing problem (e.g., dominant
Presenter: Jens Hillengass
, serum free light chains, flow cytometry, immunoparesis, MRI, and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Clinicians should also consider the concept of evolving smoldering MM, said Dr. Hillengass, because dynamically stable markers of disease are
Peter H. Carroll and James L. Mohler
MRI. Further, they support the use of active surveillance in men identified to have low-risk cancers, linked to and compliant with the NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer. Dr. Carroll acknowledged that in the 1990s and 2000s, routine screening was
L. Burt Nabors
combinations in the setting of recurrent disease. We would alert the oncology community to a couple of unique aspects concerning the use of bevacizumab in GBM. First, bevacizumab has an impact on diagnostic imaging studies, particularly MRI. A misconception
