Soft-tissue sarcomas are a diverse group of rare mesenchymal malignancies accounting for only 1% of all solid adult malignancies. These have been categorized in 12 broad groups by the World Health Organization (WHO) with their recent update in 2013. Majority of them lack specific imaging features serving as imaging conundrums for a radiologist. These are often large masses at presentation as they are asymptomatic or cause vague clinical symptoms. These tumors are challenging for surgeons as well as they find it difficult to achieve complete resection because of complex intra-abdominal anatomy and their close relationship with critical structures. Often, a multidisciplinary approach is required to decide on the most appropriate management for these complex cases so as to provide optimal patient care. Knowledge of the WHO classification, pathologic features, and treatment options available helps the radiologist make a meaningful contribution in multidisciplinary discussions of such cases and overall patient care. Liposarcoma (well-differentiated and dedifferentiated liposarcomas), leiomyosarcoma, and gastrointestinal stromal tumor are the 3 most common primary intra-abdominal sarcomas. In part 1 of this article, general features of soft-tissue sarcomas and some of the common tumors from WHO category 1-4 found in abdomen and pelvis are discussed. Part 2 will focus on common tumors from remainder of the WHO categories.Soft-tissue sarcomas are a diverse group of rare mesenchymal malignancies accounting for only 1% of all solid adult malignancies. These have been categorized in 12 broad groups by the World Health Organization (WHO) with their recent update in 2013. Majority of them lack specific imaging features serving as imaging conundrums for a radiologist. These are often large masses at presentation as they are asymptomatic or cause vague clinical symptoms. These tumors are challenging for surgeons as well as they find it difficult to achieve complete resection because of complex intra-abdominal anatomy and their close relationship with critical structures. Often, a multidisciplinary approach is required to decide on the most appropriate management for these complex cases so as to provide optimal patient care. Knowledge of the WHO classification, pathologic features and available treatment options will help the radiologist make a meaningful contribution in multidisciplinary discussions of such cases and overall patient care. Liposarcoma (well-differentiated and dedifferentiated liposarcomas), leiomyosarcoma, and gastrointestinal stromal tumor are the 3 most common primary intra-abdominal sarcomas. In part 1 of this article, general features of soft tissue sarcomas and some of the common tumors from WHO category 1-4 found in abdomen and pelvis are discussed. Part 2 will focus on common tumors from remainder of the WHO categories.Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common noncutaneous malignancy in men and the second leading cause of cancer related death in the United States. Men with clinical suspicion of PCa undergo tissue sampling and based on features including the Gleason score, Prostate Specific antigen (PSA) levels and clinical tumor (T) stage, patients are risk stratified into 6 major groups based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. This forms the basis for deciding imaging and management. Active surveillance is the preferred approach for less aggressive tumors. Blasticidin S manufacturer Surgery or radiation +/- androgen deprivation therapy continue to be the primary treatment options for localized disease. Imaging plays a critical role in the diagnosis, staging and management of PCa. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is currently the imaging modality of choice for locoregional staging. MRI, computed tomography and bone scan remain the preferred modalities for evaluation of nodal, soft tissue, and bone metastases, respectively. Advanced positron emission tomography imaging using novel radiotracers are being developed but are not yet integrated in the diagnostic guidelines for initial staging. In this review, we will discuss the imaging and treatment algorithms based on the NCCN risk groups, describe the utility of individual modalities, review Prosate Imaging and Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) version 2.1 for the reporting of mpMRI of the prostate.High-resolution phased array external magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the first investigation of choice in rectal cancer for local staging, both in the primary and restaging situations. Use of MRI helps differentiate between those with good prognosis, which can be offered upfront surgery and the poor prognostic cases where treatment intensification is needed. MRI identified poor prognostic factors are threatened or involved mesorectal fascia, T3 tumors with >5 mm extramural spread, those with extramural vascular invasion, pelvic sidewall nodes and mucinous tumors. At restaging, use of MRI helps evaluate response and an MR tumor regression grading system is being evaluated. Complete response seen on clinical examination and endoscopy, needs confirmation on MRI using both T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted sequences to justify a "watch and wait" approach. In this subset of patients, MRI also plays a role in monitoring and detecting early regrowth. In those with partial response, MRI helps define surgical margins and can be used as a roadmap to decide between sphincter preserving surgeries and radical sphincter sacrificing surgeries; pelvic exenteration and pelvic sidewall lymph node dissection. Poor responders on MRI may benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Use of MRI thus helps in individualizing treatment in rectal cancer.The responsible use of gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) requires a balance between safety and clinical utility. While nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF) has been associated with most linear GBCAs few, if any, new cases have been verified since the successful implementation of screening programs to detect renal impairment and prevent susceptible patients from receiving these higher-risk agents. The likelihood of developing nephrogenic systemic fibrosis has been shown to be negligible with macrocyclic agents, prompting the American College of Radiology and other regulatory agencies to suggest that no screening is necessary when they are used. There is no solid evidence of negative clinical effect from the retention of macrocyclic agents in the brain while there is evidence that they wash out of the brain over time. GBCAs have many important clinical uses that can help prevent morbidity or death. This article reviews the risks and benefits of GBCA administration.