PURPOSE: To examine technical parameters of measurement accuracy and differences in tumor response classification using RECIST 1.1 and volumetric assessment in three common metastasis types (lung nodules, liver lesions, lymph node metastasis) simultaneously. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 56 consecutive patients (32 female) aged 41-82 years with a wide range of metastatic solid tumors were examined with MSCT for baseline and follow up. Images were evaluated by three experienced radiologists using manual measurements and semi-automatic lesion segmentation. Institutional ethics review was obtained and all patients gave written informed consent. Data analysis comprised interobserver variability operationalized as coefficient of variation and categorical response classification according to RECIST 1.1 for both manual and volumetric measures. Continuous data were assessed for statistical significance with Wilcoxon signed-rank test and categorical data with Fleiss kappa. RESULTS: Interobserver variability was 6.3% (IQR 4.6%) for manual and 4.1% (IQR 4.4%) for volumetrically obtained sum of relevant diameters (p<0.05, corrected). 4-8 patients' response to therapy was classified differently across observers by using volumetry compared to standard manual measurements. Fleiss kappa revealed no significant difference in categorical agreement of response classification between manual (0.7558) and volumetric (0.7623) measurements. CONCLUSION: Under standard RECIST thresholds there was no advantage of volumetric compared to manual response evaluation. However volumetric assessment yielded significantly lower interobserver variability. This may allow narrower thresholds for volumetric response classification in the future.
PURPOSE: To examine technical parameters of measurement accuracy and differences in tumor response classification using RECIST 1.1 and volumetric assessment in three common metastasis types (lung nodules, liver lesions, lymph node metastasis) simultaneously. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 56 consecutive patients (32 female) aged 41-82 years with a wide range of metastatic solid tumors were examined with MSCT for baseline and follow up. Images were evaluated by three experienced radiologists using manual measurements and semi-automatic lesion segmentation. Institutional ethics review was obtained and all patients gave written informed consent. Data analysis comprised interobserver variability operationalized as coefficient of variation and categorical response classification according to RECIST 1.1 for both manual and volumetric measures. Continuous data were assessed for statistical significance with Wilcoxon signed-rank test and categorical data with Fleiss kappa. RESULTS: Interobserver variability was 6.3% (IQR 4.6%) for manual and 4.1% (IQR 4.4%) for volumetrically obtained sum of relevant diameters (p<0.05, corrected). 4-8 patients' response to therapy was classified differently across observers by using volumetry compared to standard manual measurements. Fleiss kappa revealed no significant difference in categorical agreement of response classification between manual (0.7558) and volumetric (0.7623) measurements. CONCLUSION: Under standard RECIST thresholds there was no advantage of volumetric compared to manual response evaluation. However volumetric assessment yielded significantly lower interobserver variability. This may allow narrower thresholds for volumetric response classification in the future.
Authors: Katharina S Winter; Felix O Hofmann; Kolja M Thierfelder; Julian W Holch; Nina Hesse; Alena B Baumann; Dominik P Modest; Sebastian Stintzing; Volker Heinemann; Jens Ricke; Wieland H Sommer; Melvin D'Anastasi Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-05-07 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Michael L Maitland; Julia Wilkerson; Sanja Karovic; Binsheng Zhao; Jessica Flynn; Mengxi Zhou; Patrick Hilden; Firas S Ahmed; Laurent Dercle; Chaya S Moskowitz; Ying Tang; Dana E Connors; Stacey J Adam; Gary Kelloff; Mithat Gonen; Tito Fojo; Lawrence H Schwartz; Geoffrey R Oxnard Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2020-09-28 Impact factor: 12.531