PURPOSE: To evaluate the variability of tumor unidimensional, bidimensional, and volumetric measurements on same-day repeat computed tomographic (CT) scans in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board, with informed patient consent. Thirty-two patients with non-small cell lung cancer, each of whom underwent two CT scans of the chest within 15 minutes by using the same imaging protocol, were included in this study. Three radiologists independently measured the two greatest diameters of each lesion on both scans and, during another session, measured the same tumors on the first scan. In a separate analysis, computer software was applied to assist in the calculation of the two greatest diameters and the volume of each lesion on both scans. Concordance correlation coefficients (CCCs) and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess the agreements between the measurements of the two repeat scans (reproducibility) and between the two repeat readings of the same scan (repeatability). RESULTS: The reproducibility and repeatability of the three radiologists' measurements were high (all CCCs, >or=0.96). The reproducibility of the computer-aided measurements was even higher (all CCCs, 1.00). The 95% limits of agreements for the computer-aided unidimensional, bidimensional, and volumetric measurements on two repeat scans were (-7.3%, 6.2%), (-17.6%, 19.8%), and (-12.1%, 13.4%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Chest CT scans are well reproducible. Changes in unidimensional lesion size of 8% or greater exceed the measurement variability of the computer method and can be considered significant when estimating the outcome of therapy in a patient. (c) RSNA, 2009.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the variability of tumor unidimensional, bidimensional, and volumetric measurements on same-day repeat computed tomographic (CT) scans in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board, with informed patient consent. Thirty-two patients with non-small cell lung cancer, each of whom underwent two CT scans of the chest within 15 minutes by using the same imaging protocol, were included in this study. Three radiologists independently measured the two greatest diameters of each lesion on both scans and, during another session, measured the same tumors on the first scan. In a separate analysis, computer software was applied to assist in the calculation of the two greatest diameters and the volume of each lesion on both scans. Concordance correlation coefficients (CCCs) and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess the agreements between the measurements of the two repeat scans (reproducibility) and between the two repeat readings of the same scan (repeatability). RESULTS: The reproducibility and repeatability of the three radiologists' measurements were high (all CCCs, >or=0.96). The reproducibility of the computer-aided measurements was even higher (all CCCs, 1.00). The 95% limits of agreements for the computer-aided unidimensional, bidimensional, and volumetric measurements on two repeat scans were (-7.3%, 6.2%), (-17.6%, 19.8%), and (-12.1%, 13.4%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Chest CT scans are well reproducible. Changes in unidimensional lesion size of 8% or greater exceed the measurement variability of the computer method and can be considered significant when estimating the outcome of therapy in a patient. (c) RSNA, 2009.
Authors: Dag Wormanns; Gerhard Kohl; Ernst Klotz; Anke Marheine; Florian Beyer; Walter Heindel; Stefan Diederich Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2003-11-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Binsheng Zhao; Lawrence H Schwartz; Chaya S Moskowitz; Michelle S Ginsberg; Naiyer A Rizvi; Mark G Kris Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: L H Schwartz; M S Ginsberg; D DeCorato; L N Rothenberg; S Einstein; P Kijewski; D M Panicek Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Susan M Galbraith; Martin A Lodge; N Jane Taylor; Gordon J S Rustin; Søren Bentzen; J James Stirling; Anwar R Padhani Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Helen T Winer-Muram; S Gregory Jennings; Cristopher A Meyer; Yun Liang; Alex M Aisen; Robert D Tarver; Ronald C McGarry Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jeremy J Erasmus; Gregory W Gladish; Lyle Broemeling; Bradley S Sabloff; Mylene T Truong; Roy S Herbst; Reginald F Munden Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Mizuki Nishino; David M Jackman; Hiroto Hatabu; Pasi A Jänne; Bruce E Johnson; Annick D Van den Abbeele Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2011-01-28 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Binsheng Zhao; Geoffrey R Oxnard; Chaya S Moskowitz; Mark G Kris; William Pao; Pingzhen Guo; Valerie M Rusch; Marc Ladanyi; Naiyer A Rizvi; Lawrence H Schwartz Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2010-06-09 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Mizuki Nishino; David M Jackman; Hiroto Hatabu; Beow Y Yeap; Leigh-Anne Cioffredi; Jeffrey T Yap; Pasi A Jänne; Bruce E Johnson; Annick D Van den Abbeele Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Mizuki Nishino; Mengye Guo; David M Jackman; Pamela J DiPiro; Jeffrey T Yap; Tak K Ho; Hiroto Hatabu; Pasi A Jänne; Annick D Van den Abbeele; Bruce E Johnson Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2010-10-30 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Thomas Perrin; Abhishek Midya; Rikiya Yamashita; Jayasree Chakraborty; Tome Saidon; William R Jarnagin; Mithat Gonen; Amber L Simpson; Richard K G Do Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2018-12
Authors: Luke A Hunter; Shane Krafft; Francesco Stingo; Haesun Choi; Mary K Martel; Stephen F Kry; Laurence E Court Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Yoganand Balagurunathan; Yuhua Gu; Hua Wang; Virendra Kumar; Olya Grove; Sam Hawkins; Jongphil Kim; Dmitry B Goldgof; Lawrence O Hall; Robert A Gatenby; Robert J Gillies Journal: Transl Oncol Date: 2014-02-01 Impact factor: 4.243
Authors: Emmanuel Rios Velazquez; Chintan Parmar; Ying Liu; Thibaud P Coroller; Gisele Cruz; Olya Stringfield; Zhaoxiang Ye; Mike Makrigiorgos; Fiona Fennessy; Raymond H Mak; Robert Gillies; John Quackenbush; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2017-05-31 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Michael F McNitt-Gray; Luc M Bidaut; Samuel G Armato; Charles R Meyer; Marios A Gavrielides; Charles Fenimore; Geoffrey McLennan; Nicholas Petrick; Binsheng Zhao; Anthony P Reeves; Reinhard Beichel; Hyun-Jung Grace Kim; Lisa Kinnard Journal: Transl Oncol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 4.243