Staging of XXXX at imaging: report of the radiology diagnostic oncology group.

@entity5 @entity1 @entity521
PURPOSE: To compare the accuracies of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and bone scintigraphy in @entity5 in @entity1 with @entity521 . MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-six @entity1 with newly diagnosed @entity521 were enrolled in a multicenter prospective cohort study. CT, MR, and bone scintigraphy were used to evaluate @entity5 stage. Sensitivity and specificity values and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were used to compare the accuracy of CT, MR, and scintigraphy for @entity5 staging. RESULTS: Eighty-eight @entity1 were eligible for staging analysis, and 45 @entity1 who underwent surgery at initial diagnosis were eligible for analysis of local @entity5 extent. CT and MR had sensitivities of 43% and 83%, respectively (P <.01), and specificities of 97% and 88%, respectively (P >.05), for detection of stage 4 disease. Areas under the ROC curves for CT and MR were 0.81 and 0.85, respectively (P =.06); that for scintigraphy was 0.83. Addition of scintigraphy to both CT and MR increased the areas under the ROC curves to 0.90 and 0.88, respectively. Accuracy of CT and MR for @entity5 confined to the chest or abdomen (stages 1, 2, and 3) was poor. CONCLUSION: MR alone and CT and MR combined with bone scintigraphy enable the accurate detection of stage 4 disease. Both CT and MR perform poorly for local @entity5 staging.
