The CTC offices are currently closed for refurbishment. Access to trial TMFs and patient records will be limited during this period. We will still be able to receive post during this time, but there may be a small delay in responding to this. Our fax lines may also be subject to disruption. Where possible, please direct all correspondence via email to trial-specific email addresses. We appreciate your patience and understanding.

Due to COVID-19 and current government guidance, UCL CTC staff continue to work remotely with limited access to the office. Please continue to email the trial specific mailbox with any urgent queries. For paper CRF trials, please continue to copy and scan CRFs to the trial inboxes (remove all patient identifiers except Trial Number and Initials) until further notice.

Whole-body MRI can save money and stress, according to CTC study
01 September 2019
The Streamline C study, published in The Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology, shows that for patients with colorectal cancer, a first line whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) scan works just as well as multiple scans in assessing cancer spread and leads to the same treatment decisions - but is quicker, cheaper, involves less exposure to radiation, and is preferred by patients.

Once a patient has been diagnosed with cancer, doctors usually use a combination of scans such as CT, PET and MRI to assess how the cancer has spread, as different scans are more effective for different parts of the body. But using multiple scans can take several weeks, exposes patients to higher amounts of ionising radiation, delays the start of treatment, and often adds to patient anxiety.

Streamline C, the biggest study of its kind to compare WB-MRI with standard scans in colorectal cancer, was performed at 16 NHS hospitals and recruited 299 patients. The trial used an innovative design to record the number of scans patients underwent, and captured in real time their influence on treatment decisions made by doctors. It found no significant difference in the accuracy of WB-MRI compared with standard scans in assessing cancer spread or in the treatment recommended as a result, but using WB-MRI scan removed the need for additional scans for nearly all patients, and reduced the average time taken to assess patients by almost a week.

In a small number of cases (7%), WB-MRI generated additional scans, but using initial WB-MRI, patients were fully assessed within an average of 8 days, compared to 13 days using the multiple scans in standard staging pathways. The average NHS tariff cost of a WB-MRI staging pathway was £216. This compares to £285 for the standard staging pathway.

When asked, most patients said they would prefer assessment via WB-MRI.

The UCL Centre for Medical Imaging’s Professor Stuart Taylor, chief investigator for the study, explained the benefits: ‘Use of whole-body MRI could streamline the assessment of cancer patients and become normal practice.

‘In nearly all cases, additional scans were not necessary, and the time saved could lead to treatment starting sooner.' 

He added: ‘Use of whole-body MRI can reduce the number of hospital appointments a patient has to attend, could expose patients to less radiation, and could reduce patient anxiety at what is already an incredibly stressful time’.

There are challenges to rolling out WB-MRI across the NHS because of limits on the number of available scanners, which are already in high demand, and on the number of radiologists trained to interpret WB-MRI.

However, Professor Taylor concluded: 'Our trial results show that the NHS should be investing in MRI scanners and training radiologists on interpreting WB-MRI, so that we can reap the benefits of using whole-body MRI in the NHS'.

You can read the publication here.

Contact Us
Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre
University College London
90 Tottenham Court Road

View map
+44 (0)20 7679 9898 (General CTC Enquiries)
020 7679 9899
University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT +44 (0)20 7679 2000

Copyright © 2021 UCL | Disclaimer | Freedom of Information | Accessibility | Privacy | Cookies | Contact Us