6533b7defe1ef96bd1275fa0

RESEARCH PRODUCT

The significance of a uniform definition of pathological lymph nodes in Hodgkin lymphoma: impact of different thresholds for positive lymph nodes in CT imaging on staging and therapy.

Silvia ObenauerClemens F. HessHilke VorwerkHeinz SchmidbergerElisabeth Weiss

subject

AdultMalePathologymedicine.medical_specialtyAdolescentLymph node regionsmedicine.medical_treatmentSensitivity and Specificity030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging03 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicineRisk FactorsMedicineHumansRadiology Nuclear Medicine and imagingLymph nodePathologicalAgedNeoplasm Stagingbusiness.industryRadiation fieldHematologyMiddle AgedCombined Modality TherapyHodgkin Disease3. Good healthRadiation therapymedicine.anatomical_structureOncology030220 oncology & carcinogenesisLymphatic MetastasisHodgkin lymphomaFemaleLymphRadiologyLymph NodesCt imagingbusinessTomography X-Ray Computed

description

Abstract Background and Purpose The most commonly used approach for the assessment for differentiating malignant versus reactive lymph nodes is the measurement of the cross-section diameter of the lymph nodes in the transversal CT-planes. The intention of this article is to assess the impact of varying definitions of pathological lymph node size in CT-imaging in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma and to evaluate its effect on staging, chemotherapy regimes and radiation field size. Materials and methods Pretherapeutic CT-scans of 10 consecutive patients with Hodgkin lymphoma have been evaluated based on two different definitions for malignant lymph node size; the classification of the German study group for Hodgkin lymphoma (1.0cm) and the classification according to the results of the Cotswold consensus meeting 1989 (1.5cm). Results Applying the definitions of the DHSG and the Cotswold meeting we found more affected lymph node regions compared to the evaluation of the referring institutions in 9/10 and 6/10 patients, higher stages in 2/10 and 1/10 patients, more intense chemotherapy regimes in 3/10 and 1/10 and larger radiation fields in 10/10 and 6/10 patients, respectively. Conclusions Varying definitions of pathologic lymph node size and inconsequent application of definitions reduce the comparability between different studies and within each study.

10.1016/j.radonc.2007.10.039https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18061693