Literature DB >> 25864782

Risk of malignancy in pulmonary nodules: A validation study of four prediction models.

Ali Al-Ameri1, Puneet Malhotra2, Helene Thygesen3, Paul K Plant4, Sri Vaidyanathan5, Shishir Karthik5, Andrew Scarsbrook5, Matthew E J Callister6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Clinical prediction models assess the likelihood of malignancy in pulmonary nodules detected by computed tomography (CT). This study aimed to validate four such models in a UK population of patients with pulmonary nodules. Three models used clinical and CT characteristics to predict risk (Mayo Clinic, Veterans Association, Brock University) with a fourth model (Herder et al. [4]) additionally incorporating (18)Fluorine-Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) avidity on positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The likelihood of malignancy was calculated for patients with pulmonary nodules (4-30mm diameter) and data used to calculate the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for each model. The models were used in a restricted cohort of patients based on each model's exclusion criteria and in the total cohort of all patients.
RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-four patients were studied, of whom 139 underwent FDG PET-CT. Ninety-nine (40.6%) patients were subsequently confirmed to have malignant nodules (33.2% primary lung cancer, 7.4% metastatic disease). The Mayo and Brock models performed similarly (AUC 0.895 and 0.902 respectively) and both were significantly better than the Veterans Association model (AUC 0.735, p<0.001 and p=0.002 respectively). In patients undergoing FDG PET-CT, the Herder model had significantly higher accuracy than the other three models (AUC 0.924). When the models were tested on all patients in the cohort (i.e. including those outside the original model inclusion criteria) AUC values were reduced, yet remained high especially for the Herder model (AUC 0.916). For sub-centimetre nodules, AUC values for the Mayo and Brock models were 0.788 and 0.852 respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The Mayo and Brock models showed good accuracy for determining likelihood of malignancy in nodules detected on CT scan. In patients undergoing FDG PET-CT for nodule evaluation, the highest accuracy was seen for the model described by Herder et al. incorporating FDG avidity.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  AUC values; FDG PET–CT; Lung cancer; Multiple pulmonary nodules; Prediction models; Solitary pulmonary nodule

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25864782     DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.03.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lung Cancer        ISSN: 0169-5002            Impact factor:   5.705


  51 in total

1.  Solid pulmonary nodule risk assessment and decision analysis: comparison of four prediction models in 285 cases.

Authors:  Simone Perandini; Gian Alberto Soardi; Massimiliano Motton; Arianna Rossi; Manuel Signorini; Stefania Montemezzi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-12-08       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Comments on characterization of solitary pulmonary nodules with 18F-FDG PET/CT relative activity distribution analysis.

Authors:  Orazio Schillaci; Ferdinando F Calabria
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Risk-related 18F-FDG PET/CT and new diagnostic strategies in patients with solitary pulmonary nodule: the ITALIAN multicenter trial.

Authors:  Marco Spadafora; Leonardo Pace; Laura Evangelista; Luigi Mansi; Francesco Del Prete; Giorgio Saladini; Paolo Miletto; Stefano Fanti; Silvana Del Vecchio; Luca Guerra; Giovanna Pepe; Giuseppina Peluso; Emanuele Nicolai; Giovanni Storto; Marco Ferdeghini; Alessandro Giordano; Mohsen Farsad; Orazio Schillaci; Cesare Gridelli; Alberto Cuocolo
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-05-05       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  Post-imaging pulmonary nodule mathematical prediction models: are they clinically relevant?

Authors:  Johanna Uthoff; Nicholas Koehn; Jared Larson; Samantha K N Dilger; Emily Hammond; Ann Schwartz; Brian Mullan; Rolando Sanchez; Richard M Hoffman; Jessica C Sieren
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Multicenter external validation of two malignancy risk prediction models in patients undergoing 18F-FDG-PET for solitary pulmonary nodule evaluation.

Authors:  Simone Perandini; G A Soardi; A R Larici; A Del Ciello; G Rizzardi; A Solazzo; L Mancino; F Zeraj; M Bernhart; M Signorini; M Motton; S Montemezzi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Lo, the ever confounding nipple shadow!

Authors:  W H Boo; Y C Chan
Journal:  Malays Fam Physician       Date:  2020-11-10

7.  Recommendations from the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) regarding computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Europe.

Authors:  Jesper Holst Pedersen; Witold Rzyman; Giulia Veronesi; Thomas A D'Amico; Paul Van Schil; Laureano Molins; Gilbert Massard; Gaetano Rocco
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 4.191

8.  Segmental 18F-FDG-PET/CT in a single pulmonary nodule: a better cost/effectiveness strategy.

Authors:  Marco Spadafora; Leonardo Pace; Luigi Mansi
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 9.236

9.  Region specific lung nodule management practice guideline.

Authors:  Scott Apperley; Stephen Lam
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.895

10.  Comparison of prediction models with radiological semantic features and radiomics in lung cancer diagnosis of the pulmonary nodules: a case-control study.

Authors:  Wei Wu; Larry A Pierce; Yuzheng Zhang; Sudhakar N J Pipavath; Timothy W Randolph; Kristin J Lastwika; Paul D Lampe; A McGarry Houghton; Haining Liu; Liming Xia; Paul E Kinahan
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-05-21       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.