Inter- and intraobserver variability in the evaluation of dynamic breast cancer MRI

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 24, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 1316-1325

  Beresford, Mark J ^a,b   Padhani, Anwar R ^b   Taylor, N Jane ^b   Ah See, Mei Lin ^a   Stirling, J James ^b   Makris, Andreas ^a   D'Arcy, James A ^c   Collins, David J ^c  

^a MOUNT VERNON CANCER CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

^b MOUNT VERNON HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c ROYAL MARSDEN HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; DCE MRI; Dynamic MRI; Observer experience; Observer variability

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DYNAMIC CONTRAST ENHANCED MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TIME PERCEPTION;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS;

EID: 33845328073     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.20768     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Choyke PL, Dwyer AJ, Knopp MV. Functional tumor imaging with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003;17:509-520.
2. Padhani AR. MRI for assessing antivascular cancer treatments. Br J Radiol 2003;76(Spec No 1):S60-S80.
3. Padhani AR. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in clinical oncology: current status and future directions. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;16:407-422.
4. Hayes C PA, Leach MO. Assessing changes in tumour vascular function using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. NMR Biomed 2002;15:154-163.
5. Morgan B, Thomas AL, Drevs J, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging as a biomarker for the pharmacological response of PTK787/ZK 222584, an inhibitor of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases, in patients with advanced colorectal cancer and liver metastases: results from two phase 1 studies. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:3955-3964.
6. Galbraith SM, Maxwell RJ, Lodge MA, et al. Combretastatin A4 phosphate has tumor antivascular activity in rat and man as demonstrated by dynamic magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:2831-2842.
7. George ML, Dzik-Jurasz AS, Padhani AR, et al. Non-invasive methods of assessing angiogenesis and their value in predicting response to treatment in colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 2001;88:1628-1636.
8. Devries AF, Griebel J, Kremser C, et al. Tumor microcirculation evaluated by dynamic magnetic resonance imaging predicts therapy outcome for primary rectal carcinoma. Cancer Res 2001;61:2513-2516.
9. Ah-See ML, Makris A, Taylor NJ, et al. Does vascular imaging with MRI predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in primary breast cancer? Proc Assoc 2004;23:22.
10. Martincich L, Montemurro F, Cirillo S, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the prediction of tumor response in patients with locally advanced breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Radiol Med (Torino) 2003;106:51-58.
11. Collins DJ, Padhani AR. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of tumor perfusion. Approaches and biomedical challenges. IEEE Eng Med Biol 2004;23:65-83.
12. Liney GP, Gibbs P, Hayes C, Leach MO, Turnbull LW. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the differentiation of breast tumors: user-defined versus semi-automated region-of-interest analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10:945-949.
13. Leach MO, Brindle KM, Evelhoch JL, et al. Assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapeutics using MRI: recommendations for appropriate methodology for clinical trials. Br J Radiol 2003;76(Spec No 1):S87-S91.
14. d'Arcy JA, Collins DJ, Padhani AR, Walker-Samuel S, Suckling J, Leach MO. Informatics in radiology (infoRAD): magnetic resonance imaging workbench: analysis and visualisation of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging data. Radiographics 2006;26:621-632.
15. Esserman L, Kaplan E, Partridge S, et al. MRI phenotype is associated with response to doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage III breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2001;8:549-559.
16. Parker GJ, Suckling J, Tanner SF, Padhani AR, Husband JE. Leach MO. MRIW: parametric analysis software for contrast-enhanced dynamic MR imaging in cancer. Radiographics 1998;18:497-506.
17. Weinmann HJ, Laniado M, Mutzel W. Pharmacokinetics of Gd-DTPA/dimeglumine after intravenous injection into healthy volunteers. Physiol Chem Phys Med NMR 1984;16:167-172.
18. Parker GJ, Suckling J, Tanner SF, et al. Probing tumor microvascularity by measurement, analysis and display of contrast agent uptake kinetics. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997;7:564-574.
19. Tofts PS. Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997;7:91-101.
20. Bland MJ, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Statist Methods Med Res 1999;8:135-160.
21. Jackson A. Analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Br J Radiol 2004;77:S154-166.
22. Ah-See MW, Taylor NJ, Makris A, et al. Single centre-slice versus three-slice T1-weighted DCE-MRI for predicting for pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in primary breast cancer. ISMRM Workshop, Manchester, UK, 2004. Abstract 86.
23. Leach MO, Brindle KM, Evelhoch JL, et al. The assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapies in early-stage clinical trials using magnetic resonance imaging: issues and recommendations. Br J Cancer 2005;92:1599-1610.