Variability of lung tumor measurements on repeat computed tomography scans taken within 15 minutes

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 29, Issue 23, 2011, Pages 3114-3119

  Oxnard, Geoffrey R ^a   Zhao, Binsheng ^a   Sima, Camelia S ^a   Ginsberg, Michelle S ^a   James, Leonard P ^a   Lefkowitz, Robert A ^a   Guo, Pingzhen ^a   Kris, Mark G ^a   Schwartz, Lawrence H ^a   Riely, Gregory J ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LUNG LESION; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TUMOR VOLUME;

CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 80051725760     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: 15277755     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2010.33.7071     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Karrison T.G., Maitland M.L., Stadler W.M., et al: Design of phase II cancer trials using a continuous endpoint of change in tumor size: Application to a study of sorafenib and erlotinib in non small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 99:1455-1461, 2007
2. LoRusso P.M., Anderson A.B., Boerner S.A., et al: Making the investigational oncology pipeline more efficient and effective: Are we headed in the right direction? Clin Cancer Res 16:5956-5962, 2010
3. Hopper K.D., Kasales C.J., Van Slyke M.A., et al: Analysis of interobserver and intraobserver variability in CT tumor measurements. AJR Am J Roentgenol 167:851-854, 1996 (Pubitemid 26322230)
4. Thiesse P., Ollivier L., Di Stefano-Louineau D., et al: Response rate accuracy in oncology trials: Reasons for interobserver variability: Groupe Francais d'Immunotherapie of the Federation Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer. J Clin Oncol 15:3507-3514, 1997
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 21:2574-2582, 2003 (Pubitemid 46606340)
6. Armato S.G. 3rd, Oxnard G.R., MacMahon H., et al: Measurement of mesothelioma on thoracic CT scans: A comparison of manual and computer-assisted techniques. Med Phys 31:1105-1115, 2004 (Pubitemid 38656781)
7. Zhao B., Schwartz L.H., Moskowitz C.S., et al: Pulmonary metastases: Effect of CT section thickness on measurement - Initial experience. Radiology 234:934-939, 2005 (Pubitemid 40250840)
8. Schwartz L.H., Ginsberg M.S., DeCorato D., et al: Evaluation of tumor measurements in oncology: Use of film-based and electronic techniques. J Clin Oncol 18:2179-2184, 2000 (Pubitemid 30324371)
9. Wang Y., De Bock G.H., Van Klaveren R.J., et al: Volumetric measurement of pulmonary nodules at low-dose chest CT: Effect of reconstruction setting on measurement variability. Eur Radiol 20:1180-1187, 2010
10. Goodman L.R., Gulsun M., Washington L., et al: Inherent variability of CT lung nodule measurements in vivo using semiautomated volumetric measurements. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:989-994, 2006 (Pubitemid 46100197)
11. Wormanns D., Kohl G., Klotz E., et al: Volumetric measurements of pulmonary nodules at multirow detector CT: In vivo reproducibility. Eur Radiol 14:86-92, 2004 (Pubitemid 38181058)
12. Zhao B., James L.P., Moskowitz C.S., et al: Evaluating variability in tumor measurements from same-day repeat CT scans of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Radiology 252:263-272, 2009
13. 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 45:228-247, 2009
14. Cohen E.E., Sharma M., Janisch L.A., et al: A phase I study of sirolimus (rapamycin) and bevacizumab in patients with advanced malignancies. J Clin Oncol 28:226s, 2010 (suppl; abstr 2591)
15. Price K.A., Azzoli C.G., Krug L.M., et al: Phase II trial of gefitinib and everolimus in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 5:1623-1629, 2010
16. Maitland M.L.: Volumes to learn: Advancing therapeutics with innovative computed tomography image data analysis. Clin Cancer Res 16:4493-4495, 2010
17. Miller A.B., Hoogstraten B., Staquet M., et al: Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 47: 207-214, 1981 (Pubitemid 11167383)
18. Le Cesne A., Van Glabbeke M., Verweij J., et al: Absence of progression as assessed by response evaluation criteria in solid tumors predicts survival in advanced GI stromal tumors treated with imatinib mesylate: The intergroup EORTC-ISG-AGITG phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 27:3969-3974, 2009
19. Piessevaux H., Buyse M., De Roock W., et al: Radiological tumor size decrease at week 6 is a potent predictor of outcome in chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab (BOND trial). Ann Oncol 20:1375-1382, 2009
20. Krajewski K.M., Guo M., Van den Abbeele A.D., et al: Comparison of Four Early Posttherapy Imaging Changes (EPTIC; RECIST 1.0, tumor shrinkage, computed tomography tumor density, Choi criteria) in assessing outcome to vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 59: 856-862, 2011
21. Zhao B., Oxnard G.R., Moskowitz C.S., et al: A pilot study of volume measurement as a method of tumor response evaluation to aid biomarker development. Clin Cancer Res 16:4647-4653, 2010