Suitability of semi-automated tumor response assessment of liver metastases using a dedicated software package

RoFo Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Rontgenstrahlen und der Bildgebenden Verfahren

Volumn 182, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 581-588

  Kalkmann, J ^a   Ladd, S C ^a   De Greiff, A ^a   Forsting, M ^a   Stattaus, J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ESSEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

CT spiral; liver metastases; RECIST; semi automated segmentation; software; tumor response

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; CHEMOTHERAPY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; DIGITAL CALIPER; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LIVER METASTASIS; MALE; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESPONSE EVALUATION CRITERIA IN SOLID TUMOR GUIDELINE; TUMOR VOLUME;

ADULT; AGED; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IOPAMIDOL; LIVER; LIVER NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIOLOGY INFORMATION SYSTEMS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 77953843479     PISSN: 14389029     EISSN: 14389010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1245193     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Miller A B., Hoogstraten B, Staquet M et al. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 1981 47 207-214
2. Therasse P, Arbuck S G., Eisenhauer E A. et al. 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 2000 92 205-216
3. Eisenhauer E A., Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009 45 228-247
4. Marten K, Auer F, Schmidt S et al. Inadequacy of manual measurements compared to automated CT volumetry in assessment of treatment response of pulmonary metastases using RECIST criteria. Eur Radiol 2006 16 781-790
5. Erasmus J J., Gladish G W., Broemeling L et al. Interobserver and intraobserver variability in measurement of non-small-cell carcinoma lung lesions: implications for assessment of tumor response. J Clin Oncol 2003 21 2574-2582
6. Belton A L., Saini S, Liebermann K et al. Tumour size measurement in an oncology clinical trial: comparison between off-site and on-site measurements. Clin Radiol 2003 58 311-314
7. Wormanns D, Kohl G, Klotz E et al. Volumetric measurements of pulmonary nodules at multi-row detector CT: in vivo reproducibility. Eur Radiol 2004 14 86-92
8. Keil S, Plumhans C, Behrendt F F. et al. Semi-Automated Quantification of Hepatic Lesions in a Phantom. Invest Radiol 2008 44 82-88
9. Keil S, Behrendt F F., Stanzel S et al. Semi-automated measurement of hyperdense, hypodense and heterogeneous hepatic metastasis on standard MDCT slices. Comparison of semi-automated and manual measurement of RECIST and WHO criteria. Eur Radiol 2008 18 2456-2465
10. Puesken M, Juergens K U., Edenfeld A et al. Einfluss des Vaskularisationsgrades auf die automatische Segmentierung und Messung von Lebertumoren nach RECIST in einer biphasischen Multi-Slice-CT (MSCT). Fortschr Röntgenstr 2009 181 67-73
11. Bland J M., Altman D G. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986 1 307-310
12. Lin X Z., Sun Y N., Liu Y H. et al. Liver volume in patients with or without chronic liver diseases. Hepatogastroenterology 1998 45 1069-1074
13. Bland J M., Altman D G. Measurement error and correlation coefficients. Bmj 1996 313 41-42
14. Pauls S, Kurschner C, Dharaiya E et al. Comparison of manual and automated size measurements of lung metastases on MDCT images: potential influence on therapeutic decisions. Eur J Radiol 2008 66 19-26
15. Hein P A., Romano V C., Rogalla P et al. Linear and volume measurements of pulmonary nodules at different CT dose levels intrascan and interscan analysis. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2009 181 24-31
16. Heussel C P., Meier S, Wittelsberger S et al. Quantitative CT-Verlaufskontrolle von Lebermalignomen nach RECIST und WHO im Vergleich zur Volumetrie. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2007 179 958-964
17. Hopper K D., Kasales C J., Van Slyke M A. et al. Analysis of interobserver and intraobserver variability in CT tumor measurements. Am J Roentgenol 1996 167 851-854
18. Sohaib S A., Turner B, Hanson J A. et al. CT assessment of tumour response to treatment: comparison of linear, cross-sectional and volumetric measures of tumour size. Br J Radiol 2000 73 1178-1184
19. Goei R, Lamers R J., Engelshove H A. et al. Computed tomographic staging of esophageal carcinoma: a study on interobserver variation and correlation with pathological findings. Eur J Radiol 1992 15 40-44
20. Padhani A R., Ollivier L. The RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) criteria: implications for diagnostic radiologists. Br J Radiol 2001 74 983-986
21. De Vriendt G, Rigauts H, and M eeus L. A semi-automated program for volume measurement in focal hepatic lesions: a first clinical experience. J Belge Radiol 1998 81 181-183
22. Marten K, Auer F, Schmidt S et al. Automated CT volumetry of pulmonary metastases: the effect of a reduced growth threshold and target lesion number on the reliability of therapy response assessment using RECIST criteria. Eur Radiol 2007 17 2561-2571
23. Keil S, Behrendt F F., Stanzel S et al. RECIST and WHO criteria evaluation of cervical, thoracic and abdominal lymph nodes in patients with malignant lymphoma: manual versus semi-automated measurement on standard MDCT slices. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2009 181 888-895
24. Vogel M N., Vonthein R, Schmucker S et al. Lungenrundherdvolumetrie mit optimiertem Segmentierungsalgorithmus. Genauigkeit bei verschiedenen Schichtdicken verglichen mit ein-und zweidimensionalen Messungen. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2008 180 791-797
25. Thiesse P, Ollivier L, Di Stefano-Louineau D et al. Response rate accuracy in oncology trials: reasons for interobserver variability. Groupe Francais dImmunotherapie of the Federation Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997 15 3507-3514
26. Trillet-Lenoir V, Freyer G, Kaemmerlen P et al. Assessment of tumour response to chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: accuracy of the RECIST criteria. Br J Radiol 2002 75 903-908
27. Watanabe H, Yamamoto S, Kunitoh H et al. Tumor response to chemotherapy: the validity and reproducibility of RECIST guidelines in NSCLC patients. Cancer Sci 2003 94 1015-1020
28. Park J O., Lee S I., Song S Y. et al. Measuring response in solid tumors: comparison of RECIST and WHO response criteria. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2003 33 533-537