I Fotina1, C Lütgendorf-Caucig, M Stock, R Pötter, D Georg. 1. Div. Medical Radiation Physics, Department of Radiotherapy, Medical University Vienna/AKH Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, Vienna, Austria. irina.fotina@meduniwien.ac.at
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Inter-observer studies represent a valid method for the evaluation of target definition uncertainties and contouring guidelines. However, data from the literature do not yet give clear guidelines for reporting contouring variability. Thus, the purpose of this work was to compare and discuss various methods to determine variability on the basis of clinical cases and a literature review. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, 7 prostate and 8 lung cases were contoured on CT images by 8 experienced observers. Analysis of variability included descriptive statistics, calculation of overlap measures, and statistical measures of agreement. Cross tables with ratios and correlations were established for overlap parameters. RESULTS: It was shown that the minimal set of parameters to be reported should include at least one of three volume overlap measures (i.e., generalized conformity index, Jaccard coefficient, or conformation number). High correlation between these parameters and scatter of the results was observed. CONCLUSION: A combination of descriptive statistics, overlap measure, and statistical measure of agreement or reliability analysis is required to fully report the interrater variability in delineation.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Inter-observer studies represent a valid method for the evaluation of target definition uncertainties and contouring guidelines. However, data from the literature do not yet give clear guidelines for reporting contouring variability. Thus, the purpose of this work was to compare and discuss various methods to determine variability on the basis of clinical cases and a literature review. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, 7 prostate and 8 lung cases were contoured on CT images by 8 experienced observers. Analysis of variability included descriptive statistics, calculation of overlap measures, and statistical measures of agreement. Cross tables with ratios and correlations were established for overlap parameters. RESULTS: It was shown that the minimal set of parameters to be reported should include at least one of three volume overlap measures (i.e., generalized conformity index, Jaccard coefficient, or conformation number). High correlation between these parameters and scatter of the results was observed. CONCLUSION: A combination of descriptive statistics, overlap measure, and statistical measure of agreement or reliability analysis is required to fully report the interrater variability in delineation.
Authors: Elisabeth Weiss; Susanne Richter; Thomas Krauss; Silke I Metzelthin; Andrea Hille; Olivier Pradier; Birgit Siekmeyer; Hilke Vorwerk; Clemens F Hess Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Stephen L Breen; Julia Publicover; Shiroma De Silva; Greg Pond; Kristy Brock; Brian O'Sullivan; Bernard Cummings; Laura Dawson; Anne Keller; John Kim; Jolie Ringash; Eugene Yu; Aaron Hendler; John Waldron Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-03-26 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Roel J H M Steenbakkers; Joop C Duppen; Isabelle Fitton; Kirsten E I Deurloo; Lambert J Zijp; Emile F I Comans; Apollonia L J Uitterhoeve; Patrick T R Rodrigus; Gijsbert W P Kramer; Johan Bussink; Katrien De Jaeger; José S A Belderbos; Peter J C M Nowak; Marcel van Herk; Coen R N Rasch Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-09-28 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J Kriz; C Bangard; U Haverkamp; R Bongartz; C Baues; A Engert; R-P Mueller; H T Eich Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-06-14 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: B A Jereczek-Fossa; C Pobbiati; L Santoro; C Fodor; P Fanti; S Vigorito; G Baroni; D Zerini; O De Cobelli; R Orecchia Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2013-08-17 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: B Knäusl; C Lütgendorf-Caucig; J Hopfgartner; K Dieckmann; L Kurch; T Pelz; R Pötter; D Georg Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-11-18 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: S Gwynne; E Spezi; D Sebag-Montefiore; S Mukherjee; E Miles; J Conibear; J Staffurth Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Antonio L Damato; Kanopkis Townamchai; Michele Albert; Ryan J Bair; Robert A Cormack; Joanne Jang; Arpad Kovacs; Larissa J Lee; Kimberley S Mak; Kristina L Mirabeau-Beale; Kent W Mouw; John G Phillips; Jennifer L Pretz; Andrea L Russo; John H Lewis; Akila N Viswanathan Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-05-03 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Panayiotis Mavroidis; Drosoula Giantsoudis; Musaddiq J Awan; Jasper Nijkamp; Coen R N Rasch; Joop C Duppen; Charles R Thomas; Paul Okunieff; William E Jones; Lisa A Kachnic; Niko Papanikolaou; Clifton D Fuller Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 6.280