ESOI-ESUR multicentre validation of a structured MRI report for cervical cancer staging

Abstract Objectives To compare an International Federation of Gyneology and Obstetrics (FIGO)-anchored structured MRI report with conventional narrative reporting for cervical cancer staging by evaluating referring clinicians’ satisfaction. Materials and methods In this prospective multicentre crossover study (January–June 2024), consecutive patients with biopsy-proven cervical cancer at any FIGO stage underwent staging MRI at five European centres. For each patient, one narrative and one structured report were produced and independently evaluated by gynaecologists and radiation oncologists using a 12-item questionnaire (5-point Likert scale): five general items (Q1–Q5) for both formats and seven feature-specific items (Q6–Q12) for structured reports only. The primary endpoint was the proportion of structured-report evaluations with an overall score ≥ 20 (target ≥ 80%). Paired comparisons used the Wilcoxon signed-rank test with matched-pairs rank-biserial correlation (r) as effect size. Results One hundred patients were evaluated, yielding 200 report evaluations. Of 100 structured report evaluations, 98.0% (95% Clopper-Pearson CI: 93.0–99.8%) achieved an overall score ≥ 20, exceeding the 80% threshold, vs 78.0% (95% CI: 68.6–85.7%) for narrative reports. Structured reports scored significantly higher on all five general items and on the overall score (all p < 0.05), with the largest effects for readability ( r = 0.95) and brevity ( r = 0.85). The advantage was consistent across reader type, disease stage, and centre, with the strongest effect in locally advanced disease. Q6 (cervical stromal invasion) had the lowest feature-specific satisfaction (73.7% scoring ≥ 4), prompting template revision. Conclusion A structured MRI report for cervical cancer staging significantly outperformed narrative reporting across all quality domains in a multicentre crossover design. Key Points Question Cervical cancer management is highly stage-dependent, yet evidence on clinician-centred benefit of structured vs narrative MRI staging reports in routine practice is scarce. Findings In a multicentre crossover study, a FIGO-anchored structured MRI report significantly outperformed narrative reporting on all five general quality domains. Clinical relevance A structured MRI report standardises the communication of staging features that drive cervical cancer management and is preferred by referring clinicians over narrative reporting across specialties, disease stages, and European centres .

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Radiology
Published
2026-11-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-026-13022-4
Primary Topic
Radiology practices and education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
article

ESOI-ESUR multicentre validation of a structured MRI report for cervical cancer staging

Benedetta Gui, Marius Erik Mayerhoefer, Arnaldo Stanzione, Beatrice Carreri et al.
1 links
European Radiology
Radiology practices and education
article

ESOI-ESUR multicentre validation of a structured MRI report for cervical cancer staging

Benedetta Gui, Marius Erik Mayerhoefer, Arnaldo Stanzione, Beatrice Carreri, Pietro Andrea Bonaffini, Giacomo Avesani, Alejandra García-Baizán, Stéphanie Nougaret, Milagros Otero-García, Sylvain Demontoy, Thierry N. Boellaard, Nicolò Bizzarri, Doris Leithner, Lúcia Correia, Amreen Shakur, Teresa Margarida Cunha, Iztok Caglič, Melvin D’Anastasi, Raul Colaço, Ramona Woitek, Roxana Maria Pintican, Mathias Neron, Li Tee Tan, Rosa Autorino, Pierre Colombo, Helen Bolton, Evis Sala, Luca Russo, Structured Report in Cervical Cancer (StReCC) study group, Elena Hernandez-Piñeiro, Susan Freeman, Gloria Cordeiro-Vidal
article en

Abstract

Abstract Objectives To compare an International Federation of Gyneology and Obstetrics (FIGO)-anchored structured MRI report with conventional narrative reporting for cervical cancer staging by evaluating referring clinicians’ satisfaction. Materials and methods In this prospective multicentre crossover study (January–June 2024), consecutive patients with biopsy-proven cervical cancer at any FIGO stage underwent staging MRI at five European centres. For each patient, one narrative and one structured report were produced and independently evaluated by gynaecologists and radiation oncologists using a 12-item questionnaire (5-point Likert scale): five general items (Q1–Q5) for both formats and seven feature-specific items (Q6–Q12) for structured reports only. The primary endpoint was the proportion of structured-report evaluations with an overall score ≥ 20 (target ≥ 80%). Paired comparisons used the Wilcoxon signed-rank test with matched-pairs rank-biserial correlation (r) as effect size. Results One hundred patients were evaluated, yielding 200 report evaluations. Of 100 structured report evaluations, 98.0% (95% Clopper-Pearson CI: 93.0–99.8%) achieved an overall score ≥ 20, exceeding the 80% threshold, vs 78.0% (95% CI: 68.6–85.7%) for narrative reports. Structured reports scored significantly higher on all five general items and on the overall score (all p < 0.05), with the largest effects for readability ( r = 0.95) and brevity ( r = 0.85). The advantage was consistent across reader type, disease stage, and centre, with the strongest effect in locally advanced disease. Q6 (cervical stromal invasion) had the lowest feature-specific satisfaction (73.7% scoring ≥ 4), prompting template revision. Conclusion A structured MRI report for cervical cancer staging significantly outperformed narrative reporting across all quality domains in a multicentre crossover design. Key Points Question Cervical cancer management is highly stage-dependent, yet evidence on clinician-centred benefit of structured vs narrative MRI staging reports in routine practice is scarce. Findings In a multicentre crossover study, a FIGO-anchored structured MRI report significantly outperformed narrative reporting on all five general quality domains. Clinical relevance A structured MRI report standardises the communication of staging features that drive cervical cancer management and is preferred by referring clinicians over narrative reporting across specialties, disease stages, and European centres .

European Radiology
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (IT), University College Hospital (GB), Danube Private University (AT), University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Inserm (FR), University of Malta (MT), Université de Montpellier (FR), Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy (RO), University of Cambridge (GB), Mater Dei Hospital (MT), University Hospital Complex Of Vigo (ES), Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic (IT), The Netherlands Cancer Institute (NL), Instituto Português de Oncologia Francisco Gentil (PT), Ospedale Papa Giovanni XXIII (IT), Institut de Recherche en Cancérologie de Montpellier (FR), Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IT), Addenbrooke's Hospital (GB), University College London (GB), New York University (US), University of Milano-Bicocca (IT), University of Naples Federico II (IT), Medical University of Vienna (AT)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Radiology practices and education
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon