Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology 1/2021

10.06.2020 | Hepatobiliary

Variability of quantitative measurements of metastatic liver lesions: a multi-radiation-dose-level and multi-reader comparison

verfasst von: Yuqin Ding, Daniele Marin, Federica Vernuccio, Fernando Gonzalez, Hannah V. Williamson, Hans-Christoph Becker, Bhavik N. Patel, Justin Solomon, Juan Carlos Ramirez-Giraldo, Ehsan Samei, Rendon C. Nelson, Mathias Meyer

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 1/2021

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the variability of quantitative measurements of metastatic liver lesions by using a multi-radiation-dose-level and multi-reader comparison.

Methods

Twenty-three study subjects (mean age, 60 years) with 39 liver lesions who underwent a single-energy dual-source contrast-enhanced staging CT between June 2015 and December 2015 were included. CT data were reconstructed with seven different radiation dose levels (ranging from 25 to 100%) on the basis of a single CT acquisition. Four radiologists independently performed manual tumor measurements and two radiologists performed semi-automated tumor measurements. Interobserver, intraobserver, and interdose sources of variability for longest diameter and volumetric measurements were estimated and compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and intraclass correlation coefficients.

Results

Inter- and intraobserver variabilities for manual measurements of the longest diameter were higher compared to semi-automated measurements (p < 0.001 for overall). Inter- and intraobserver variabilities of volume measurements were higher compared to the longest diameter measurement (p < 0.001 for overall). Quantitative measurements were statistically different at < 50% radiation dose levels for semi-automated measurements of the longest diameter, and at 25% radiation dose level for volumetric measurements. The variability related to radiation dose was not significantly different from the inter- and intraobserver variability for the measurements of the longest diameter.

Conclusion

The variability related to radiation dose is comparable to the inter- and intraobserver variability for measurements of the longest diameter. Caution should be warranted in reducing radiation dose level below 50% of a conventional CT protocol due to the potentially detrimental impact on the assessment of lesion response in the liver.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. (2000)New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205-216.CrossRef Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. (2000)New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205-216.CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al.(2009)New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45:228-247.CrossRef Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al.(2009)New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45:228-247.CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Sargent DJ, Rubinstein L, Schwartz L, et al.(2009)Validation of novel imaging methodologies for use as cancer clinical trial end-points. Eur J Cancer 45:290-299.CrossRef Sargent DJ, Rubinstein L, Schwartz L, et al.(2009)Validation of novel imaging methodologies for use as cancer clinical trial end-points. Eur J Cancer 45:290-299.CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Prasad SR, Jhaveri KS, Saini S, Hahn PF, Halpern EF, Sumner JE.(2002)CT tumor measurement for therapeutic response assessment: comparison of unidimensional, bidimensional, and volumetric techniques initial observations. Radiology 225:416-419.CrossRef Prasad SR, Jhaveri KS, Saini S, Hahn PF, Halpern EF, Sumner JE.(2002)CT tumor measurement for therapeutic response assessment: comparison of unidimensional, bidimensional, and volumetric techniques initial observations. Radiology 225:416-419.CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Mantatzis M, Kakolyris S, Amarantidis K, Karayiannakis A, Prassopoulos P.(2009) Treatment response classification of liver metastatic disease evaluated on imaging. Are RECIST unidimensional measurements accurate? Eur Radiol 19:1809-1816.CrossRef Mantatzis M, Kakolyris S, Amarantidis K, Karayiannakis A, Prassopoulos P.(2009) Treatment response classification of liver metastatic disease evaluated on imaging. Are RECIST unidimensional measurements accurate? Eur Radiol 19:1809-1816.CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Suzuki C, Torkzad MR, Jacobsson H, et al.(2010) Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the response evaluation of cancer therapy according to RECIST and WHO-criteria. Acta Oncol 49:509-514.CrossRef Suzuki C, Torkzad MR, Jacobsson H, et al.(2010) Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the response evaluation of cancer therapy according to RECIST and WHO-criteria. Acta Oncol 49:509-514.CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Bauknecht HC, Romano VC, Rogalla P, et al. (2010)Intra- and interobserver variability of linear and volumetric measurements of brain metastases using contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 45:49-56.CrossRef Bauknecht HC, Romano VC, Rogalla P, et al. (2010)Intra- and interobserver variability of linear and volumetric measurements of brain metastases using contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 45:49-56.CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Bonekamp D, Bonekamp S, Halappa VG, et al. (2014)Interobserver agreement of semi-automated and manual measurements of functional MRI metrics of treatment response in hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Radiol 83:487-496.CrossRef Bonekamp D, Bonekamp S, Halappa VG, et al. (2014)Interobserver agreement of semi-automated and manual measurements of functional MRI metrics of treatment response in hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Radiol 83:487-496.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Dinkel J, Khalilzadeh O, Hintze C, et al.(2013)Inter-observer reproducibility of semi-automatic tumor diameter measurement and volumetric analysis in patients with lung cancer. Lung Cancer 82:76-82.CrossRef Dinkel J, Khalilzadeh O, Hintze C, et al.(2013)Inter-observer reproducibility of semi-automatic tumor diameter measurement and volumetric analysis in patients with lung cancer. Lung Cancer 82:76-82.CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Erasmus JJ, Gladish GW, Broemeling L, et al.(2003)Interobserver and intraobserver variability in measurement of non-small-cell carcinoma lung lesions: implications for assessment of tumor response. J Clin Oncol 21:2574-2582.CrossRef Erasmus JJ, Gladish GW, Broemeling L, et al.(2003)Interobserver and intraobserver variability in measurement of non-small-cell carcinoma lung lesions: implications for assessment of tumor response. J Clin Oncol 21:2574-2582.CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Karademir I, Ward E, Peng Y, et al.(2016)Measurements of Hepatic Metastasis on MR Imaging:: Assessment of Interobserver and Intersequence Variability. Acad Radiol 23:132-143.CrossRef Karademir I, Ward E, Peng Y, et al.(2016)Measurements of Hepatic Metastasis on MR Imaging:: Assessment of Interobserver and Intersequence Variability. Acad Radiol 23:132-143.CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Krajewski KM, Nishino M, Franchetti Y, Ramaiya NH, Van den Abbeele AD, Choueiri TK.(2014)Intraobserver and interobserver variability in computed tomography size and attenuation measurements in patients with renal cell carcinoma receiving antiangiogenic therapy: implications for alternative response criteria. Cancer-Am Cancer Soc 120:711-721. Krajewski KM, Nishino M, Franchetti Y, Ramaiya NH, Van den Abbeele AD, Choueiri TK.(2014)Intraobserver and interobserver variability in computed tomography size and attenuation measurements in patients with renal cell carcinoma receiving antiangiogenic therapy: implications for alternative response criteria. Cancer-Am Cancer Soc 120:711-721.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat McErlean A, Panicek DM, Zabor EC, et al.(2013)Intra- and interobserver variability in CT measurements in oncology. Radiology 269:451-459.CrossRef McErlean A, Panicek DM, Zabor EC, et al.(2013)Intra- and interobserver variability in CT measurements in oncology. Radiology 269:451-459.CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Kuhl CK, Alparslan Y, Schmoee J, et al.(2019)Validity of RECIST Version 1.1 for Response Assessment in Metastatic Cancer: A Prospective, Multireader Study. Radiology 290:349-356.PubMed Kuhl CK, Alparslan Y, Schmoee J, et al.(2019)Validity of RECIST Version 1.1 for Response Assessment in Metastatic Cancer: A Prospective, Multireader Study. Radiology 290:349-356.PubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Zhao B, Schwartz LH, Moskowitz CS, et al. (2005)Pulmonary metastases: effect of CT section thickness on measurement--initial experience. Radiology 234:934-939.CrossRef Zhao B, Schwartz LH, Moskowitz CS, et al. (2005)Pulmonary metastases: effect of CT section thickness on measurement--initial experience. Radiology 234:934-939.CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Zhao B, Tan Y, Bell DJ, et al.(2013)Exploring intra- and inter-reader variability in uni-dimensional, bi-dimensional, and volumetric measurements of solid tumors on CT scans reconstructed at different slice intervals. Eur J Radiol 82:959-968.CrossRef Zhao B, Tan Y, Bell DJ, et al.(2013)Exploring intra- and inter-reader variability in uni-dimensional, bi-dimensional, and volumetric measurements of solid tumors on CT scans reconstructed at different slice intervals. Eur J Radiol 82:959-968.CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Sakai N, Yabuuchi H, Kondo M, et al.(2015)Volumetric measurement of artificial pure ground-glass nodules at low-dose CT: Comparisons between hybrid iterative reconstruction and filtered back projection. Eur J Radiol 84:2654-2662.CrossRef Sakai N, Yabuuchi H, Kondo M, et al.(2015)Volumetric measurement of artificial pure ground-glass nodules at low-dose CT: Comparisons between hybrid iterative reconstruction and filtered back projection. Eur J Radiol 84:2654-2662.CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Mileto A, Nelson RC, Larson DG, et al.(2017)Variability in Radiation Dose From Repeat Identical CT Examinations: Longitudinal Analysis of 2851 Patients Undergoing 12,635 Thoracoabdominal CT Scans in an Academic Health System. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:1285-1296.CrossRef Mileto A, Nelson RC, Larson DG, et al.(2017)Variability in Radiation Dose From Repeat Identical CT Examinations: Longitudinal Analysis of 2851 Patients Undergoing 12,635 Thoracoabdominal CT Scans in an Academic Health System. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:1285-1296.CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Jaffe TA, Yoshizumi TT, Toncheva G, et al.(2009)Radiation dose for body CT protocols: variability of scanners at one institution. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:1141-1147.CrossRef Jaffe TA, Yoshizumi TT, Toncheva G, et al.(2009)Radiation dose for body CT protocols: variability of scanners at one institution. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:1141-1147.CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Young S, Kim HJ, Ko MM, Ko WW, Flores C, McNitt-Gray MF.(2015)Variability in CT lung-nodule volumetry: Effects of dose reduction and reconstruction methods. Med Phys 42:2679-2689.CrossRef Young S, Kim HJ, Ko MM, Ko WW, Flores C, McNitt-Gray MF.(2015)Variability in CT lung-nodule volumetry: Effects of dose reduction and reconstruction methods. Med Phys 42:2679-2689.CrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Solomon J, Zhang Y, Marin D, Samei E.(2016)SU-G-206-13: Validating Dose Split: A Method to Image the Same Patient at Multiple Doses with a Single CT Acquisition. Med Phys 43 (6Part25):36–42. Solomon J, Zhang Y, Marin D, Samei E.(2016)SU-G-206-13: Validating Dose Split: A Method to Image the Same Patient at Multiple Doses with a Single CT Acquisition. Med Phys 43 (6Part25):36–42.
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Menzel H, Schibila H, Teunen D.(2000)European Guidelines on Quality Criteria for Computed Tomography. Luxembourg: European Commission Publication. Menzel H, Schibila H, Teunen D.(2000)European Guidelines on Quality Criteria for Computed Tomography. Luxembourg: European Commission Publication.
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Sica GT. Bias in research studies.(2006)Radiology 238:780–789. Sica GT. Bias in research studies.(2006)Radiology 238:780–789.
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Matthias Gamer, Jim Lemon and Ian Fellows Puspendra Singh. irr: Various Coefficients of Interrater Reliability and Agreement. R package version 0.84. https://www.r-project.org. Published Jan 26, 2019. Accessed Mar 1, 2019. Matthias Gamer, Jim Lemon and Ian Fellows Puspendra Singh. irr: Various Coefficients of Interrater Reliability and Agreement. R package version 0.84. https://​www.​r-project.​org. Published Jan 26, 2019. Accessed Mar 1, 2019.
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Koo TK, Li MY. (2016)A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. J Chiropr Med 15:155–163. Koo TK, Li MY. (2016)A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. J Chiropr Med 15:155–163.
27.
Zurück zum Zitat McCollough CH, Chen GH, Kalender W, et al. (2012)Achieving routine submillisievert CT scanning: report from the summit on management of radiation dose in CT. Radiology 264:567-580.CrossRef McCollough CH, Chen GH, Kalender W, et al. (2012)Achieving routine submillisievert CT scanning: report from the summit on management of radiation dose in CT. Radiology 264:567-580.CrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Kanal KM, Chung JH, Wang J, et al. (2011)Image noise and liver lesion detection with MDCT: a phantom study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:437-441.CrossRef Kanal KM, Chung JH, Wang J, et al. (2011)Image noise and liver lesion detection with MDCT: a phantom study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:437-441.CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Mileto A, Zamora DA, Alessio AM, et al.(2018)CT Detectability of Small Low-Contrast Hypoattenuating Focal Lesions: Iterative Reconstructions versus Filtered Back Projection. Radiology 289:443-454.CrossRef Mileto A, Zamora DA, Alessio AM, et al.(2018)CT Detectability of Small Low-Contrast Hypoattenuating Focal Lesions: Iterative Reconstructions versus Filtered Back Projection. Radiology 289:443-454.CrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Buerke B, Puesken M, Muter S, et al.(2010)Measurement accuracy and reproducibility of semiautomated metric and volumetric lymph node analysis in MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:979-985.CrossRef Buerke B, Puesken M, Muter S, et al.(2010)Measurement accuracy and reproducibility of semiautomated metric and volumetric lymph node analysis in MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:979-985.CrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat van Kessel CS, van Leeuwen MS, Witteveen PO, Kwee TC, Verkooijen HM, van Hillegersberg R.(2012)Semi-automatic software increases CT measurement accuracy but not response classification of colorectal liver metastases after chemotherapy. Eur J Radiol 81:2543-2549.CrossRef van Kessel CS, van Leeuwen MS, Witteveen PO, Kwee TC, Verkooijen HM, van Hillegersberg R.(2012)Semi-automatic software increases CT measurement accuracy but not response classification of colorectal liver metastases after chemotherapy. Eur J Radiol 81:2543-2549.CrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Zhao B, James LP, Moskowitz CS, et al.(2009)Evaluating variability in tumor measurements from same-day repeat CT scans of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Radiology 252:263-272.CrossRef Zhao B, James LP, Moskowitz CS, et al.(2009)Evaluating variability in tumor measurements from same-day repeat CT scans of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Radiology 252:263-272.CrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Keil S, Plumhans C, Behrendt FF, et al.(2009)Semi-automated quantification of hepatic lesions in a phantom. Invest Radiol 44:82-88.CrossRef Keil S, Plumhans C, Behrendt FF, et al.(2009)Semi-automated quantification of hepatic lesions in a phantom. Invest Radiol 44:82-88.CrossRef
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Fabel M, von Tengg-Kobligk H, Giesel FL, et al.(2008)Semi-automated volumetric analysis of lymph node metastases in patients with malignant melanoma stage III/IV--a feasibility study. Eur Radiol 18:1114-1122.CrossRef Fabel M, von Tengg-Kobligk H, Giesel FL, et al.(2008)Semi-automated volumetric analysis of lymph node metastases in patients with malignant melanoma stage III/IV--a feasibility study. Eur Radiol 18:1114-1122.CrossRef
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Kalkmann J, Ladd SC, de Greiff A, Forsting M, Stattaus J.(2010)Suitability of semi-automated tumor response assessment of liver metastases using a dedicated software package. Rofo 182:581-588.CrossRef Kalkmann J, Ladd SC, de Greiff A, Forsting M, Stattaus J.(2010)Suitability of semi-automated tumor response assessment of liver metastases using a dedicated software package. Rofo 182:581-588.CrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Li Q, Liang Y, Huang Q, et al.(2016)Volumetry of low-contrast liver lesions with CT: Investigation of estimation uncertainties in a phantom study. Med Phys 43:6608.CrossRef Li Q, Liang Y, Huang Q, et al.(2016)Volumetry of low-contrast liver lesions with CT: Investigation of estimation uncertainties in a phantom study. Med Phys 43:6608.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Variability of quantitative measurements of metastatic liver lesions: a multi-radiation-dose-level and multi-reader comparison
verfasst von
Yuqin Ding
Daniele Marin
Federica Vernuccio
Fernando Gonzalez
Hannah V. Williamson
Hans-Christoph Becker
Bhavik N. Patel
Justin Solomon
Juan Carlos Ramirez-Giraldo
Ehsan Samei
Rendon C. Nelson
Mathias Meyer
Publikationsdatum
10.06.2020
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 1/2021
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02601-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2021

Abdominal Radiology 1/2021 Zur Ausgabe

Classics in Abdominal Radiology

The caterpillar sign

Special Section: Liver Transplantation

Post-operative imaging anatomy in liver transplantation

Special Section: Liver Transplantation

Elastography in the evaluation of liver allograft

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.