Citations

The mechanisms underlying aneuploidy in multiple myeloma (MM) are unclear. Centrosome amplification has been implicated as the cause of chromosomal instability in a variety of tumors and is a potential mechanism causing aneuploidy in MM. Using immunofluorescent (IF) staining, centrosome amplification was detected in 67% of monoclonal gammopathies, including monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS). We also investigated the gene expression of centrosome proteins. Overall, gene expression data correlated well with IF-detected centrosome amplification, allowing us to derive a gene expression-based centrosome index (CI) as a surrogate for centrosome amplification. Clinically, MM patients with high CI (> 4) are associated with poor prognostic genetic and clinical subtypes (chromosome 13 deletion, t(4; 14), t(14;16), and PCLI > 1%, P < .05) and are shown here to have short survival (11.1 months versus 39.1 months, P < .001). On multivariate regression, a high CI is an independent prognostic factor. Given that centrosome amplification is already observed in MGUS and probably integral to early chromosomal instability and myeloma genesis, and patients with more extensive centrosome amplification have shorter survival, the mechanisms leading to centrosome amplification should be investigated because these may offer new avenues for therapeutic intervention.

Purpose To compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) with each other and to International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) clinical staging in the pretreatment evaluation of early invasive cervical cancer, using surgicopathologic findings as the reference standard. Patients and Methods This prospective multicenter clinical study was conducted by the American College of Radiology Imaging Network and the Gynecologic Oncology Group from March 2000 to November 2002; 25 United States health centers enrolled 208 consecutive patients with biopsy-confirmed cervical cancer of FIGO stage ≥ IB who were scheduled for surgery based on clinical assessment. Patients underwent FIGO clinical staging, helical CT, and MRI. Surgicopathologic findings constituted the reference standard for statistical analysis. Results Complete data were available for 172 patients; surgicopathologic findings were consistent with FIGO stages IA to IIA in 76% and stage ≥ IIB in 21%. For the detection of advanced stage (≥ IIB), sensitivity was poor for FIGO clinical staging (29%), CT (42%), and MRI (53%); specificity was 99% for FIGO clinical staging, 82% for CT, and 74% for MRI; and negative predictive value was 84% for FIGO clinical staging, 84% for CT, and 85% for MRI. MRI (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.88) was significantly better than CT (AUC, 0.73) for detecting cervical tumors (P = .014). For 85% of patients, FIGO clinical staging forms were submitted after MRI and/or CT was performed. Conclusion CT and MRI performed similarly; both had lower staging accuracy than in prior single-institution studies. Accuracy of FIGO clinical staging was higher than previously reported. The temporal data suggest that FIGO clinical staging was influenced by CT and MRI findings.