Cargando…

Predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB‐MRI) or CT/ PET‐CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer

INTRODUCTION: Whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB‐MRI) may be more efficient in staging cancers, but can be harder for patients to tolerate. We examined predictors of patient preference for WB‐MRI vs. CT/ PET‐CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer. METHODS: Patients recruited prospectively t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Miles, Anne, Evans, Ruth EC, Halligan, Steve, Beare, Sandy, Bridgewater, John, Goh, Vicky, Janes, Sam M, Navani, Neal, Oliver, Alfred, Morton, Alison, Morris, Steve, Rockall, Andrea, Taylor, Stuart A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8425331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32410378
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13038
_version_ 1783749832361377792
author Miles, Anne
Evans, Ruth EC
Halligan, Steve
Beare, Sandy
Bridgewater, John
Goh, Vicky
Janes, Sam M
Navani, Neal
Oliver, Alfred
Morton, Alison
Morris, Steve
Rockall, Andrea
Taylor, Stuart A
author_facet Miles, Anne
Evans, Ruth EC
Halligan, Steve
Beare, Sandy
Bridgewater, John
Goh, Vicky
Janes, Sam M
Navani, Neal
Oliver, Alfred
Morton, Alison
Morris, Steve
Rockall, Andrea
Taylor, Stuart A
author_sort Miles, Anne
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB‐MRI) may be more efficient in staging cancers, but can be harder for patients to tolerate. We examined predictors of patient preference for WB‐MRI vs. CT/ PET‐CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer. METHODS: Patients recruited prospectively to two multicentre trials comparing diagnostic accuracy of WB‐MRI with standard staging scans were sent two questionnaires: the first, administered at trial registration, captured demographics, educational level and comorbidities; the second, administered after staging completion, measured emotional distress (GHQ‐12), positive mood (PANAS), perceived scan burden, patients’ beliefs about WB‐MRI, and preference for either WB‐MRI or CT (colorectal trial), WB‐MRI or PET‐CT (lung trial). Preference for WB‐MRI or CT/ PET‐CT was analysed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Baseline and post‐staging questionnaires were completed by 97 and 107 patients, respectively. Overall, 56/107 (52%) preferred WB‐MRI over standard scans and were more likely to have no additional comorbidities, higher positive mood, greater awareness of potential benefits of WB‐MRI and lower levels of perceived WB‐MRI scan burden. In adjusted analyses, only awareness of potential WB‐MRI benefits remained a significant predictor (OR: 1.516, 95% CIs 1.006–2.284, P = 0.047). Knowledge that WB‐MRI does not use radiation predicted preference (adjusted OR: 3.018, 95% CIs 1.099–8.288, P = 0.032), although only 45/107 (42%) patients were aware of this attribute. CONCLUSIONS: A small majority of patients undergoing staging of colorectal or lung cancer prefer WB‐MRI to CT/ PET‐CT. Raising awareness of the potential benefits of WB‐MRI, notably lack of ionizing radiation, could influence preference.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8425331
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84253312021-09-13 Predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB‐MRI) or CT/ PET‐CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer Miles, Anne Evans, Ruth EC Halligan, Steve Beare, Sandy Bridgewater, John Goh, Vicky Janes, Sam M Navani, Neal Oliver, Alfred Morton, Alison Morris, Steve Rockall, Andrea Taylor, Stuart A J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol MEDICAL IMAGING—RADIATION ONCOLOGY INTRODUCTION: Whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB‐MRI) may be more efficient in staging cancers, but can be harder for patients to tolerate. We examined predictors of patient preference for WB‐MRI vs. CT/ PET‐CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer. METHODS: Patients recruited prospectively to two multicentre trials comparing diagnostic accuracy of WB‐MRI with standard staging scans were sent two questionnaires: the first, administered at trial registration, captured demographics, educational level and comorbidities; the second, administered after staging completion, measured emotional distress (GHQ‐12), positive mood (PANAS), perceived scan burden, patients’ beliefs about WB‐MRI, and preference for either WB‐MRI or CT (colorectal trial), WB‐MRI or PET‐CT (lung trial). Preference for WB‐MRI or CT/ PET‐CT was analysed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Baseline and post‐staging questionnaires were completed by 97 and 107 patients, respectively. Overall, 56/107 (52%) preferred WB‐MRI over standard scans and were more likely to have no additional comorbidities, higher positive mood, greater awareness of potential benefits of WB‐MRI and lower levels of perceived WB‐MRI scan burden. In adjusted analyses, only awareness of potential WB‐MRI benefits remained a significant predictor (OR: 1.516, 95% CIs 1.006–2.284, P = 0.047). Knowledge that WB‐MRI does not use radiation predicted preference (adjusted OR: 3.018, 95% CIs 1.099–8.288, P = 0.032), although only 45/107 (42%) patients were aware of this attribute. CONCLUSIONS: A small majority of patients undergoing staging of colorectal or lung cancer prefer WB‐MRI to CT/ PET‐CT. Raising awareness of the potential benefits of WB‐MRI, notably lack of ionizing radiation, could influence preference. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-05-14 2020-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8425331/ /pubmed/32410378 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13038 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle MEDICAL IMAGING—RADIATION ONCOLOGY
Miles, Anne
Evans, Ruth EC
Halligan, Steve
Beare, Sandy
Bridgewater, John
Goh, Vicky
Janes, Sam M
Navani, Neal
Oliver, Alfred
Morton, Alison
Morris, Steve
Rockall, Andrea
Taylor, Stuart A
Predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB‐MRI) or CT/ PET‐CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer
title Predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB‐MRI) or CT/ PET‐CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer
title_full Predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB‐MRI) or CT/ PET‐CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer
title_fullStr Predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB‐MRI) or CT/ PET‐CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer
title_full_unstemmed Predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB‐MRI) or CT/ PET‐CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer
title_short Predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB‐MRI) or CT/ PET‐CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer
title_sort predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (wb‐mri) or ct/ pet‐ct for staging colorectal or lung cancer
topic MEDICAL IMAGING—RADIATION ONCOLOGY
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8425331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32410378
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13038
work_keys_str_mv AT milesanne predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT evansruthec predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT halligansteve predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT bearesandy predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT bridgewaterjohn predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT gohvicky predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT janessamm predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT navanineal predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT oliveralfred predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT mortonalison predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT morrissteve predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT rockallandrea predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT taylorstuarta predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer
AT predictorsofpatientpreferenceforeitherwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingwbmriorctpetctforstagingcolorectalorlungcancer