MSCT follow-up in malignant lymphoma: Comparison of manual linear measurements with semi-automated lymph node analysis for therapy response classification

RoFo Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Rontgenstrahlen und der Bildgebenden Verfahren

Volumn 184, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 795-804

  Wessling J ^a   Puesken, M ^a   Koch, R ^a   Kohlhase, N ^a   Persigehl, T ^a   Mesters, R ^a   Heindel, W ^a   Buerke, B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MÜNSTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

CT; lymphatic; lymphoma; segmentation; treatment effects

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LONG AXIS DIAMETER; LYMPHOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MANUAL LINEAR MEASUREMENT; MCNEMAR TEST; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NON INVASIVE MEASUREMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEMIAUTOMATED LYMPH NODE ANALYSIS; SHORT AXIS DIAMETER; STANDARD; STUDENT T TEST; TREATMENT RESPONSE; TUMOR VOLUME; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LYMPH NODES; LYMPHOMA; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84865801948     PISSN: 14389029     EISSN: 14389010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1312751     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Elstrom R, Guan L, Baker G et al. Utility of FDG-PET scanning in lymphoma by WHO classification. Blood: 2003; 101 3875 3876 (Pubitemid 36857861)
2. Puesken M, Buerke B, Gerss J et al. Prediction of lymph node manifestations in malignant lymphoma: significant role of volumetric compared with established metric lymph node analysis in multislice computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr: 2010; 34 564 569
3. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y et al. From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med: 2009; 50 122S 150S
4. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA 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
5. Jaffe TA, Wickersham NW, Sullivan DC. Quantitative imaging in oncology patients: Part 1, radiology practice patterns at major U. S. cancer centers. Am J Roentgenol: 2010; 195 101 106
6. Assouline S, Meyer RM, Infante-Rivard C et al. Development of adapted RECIST criteria to assess response in lymphoma and their comparison to the International Workshop Criteria. Leuk Lymphoma: 2007; 48 513 520 (Pubitemid 46487758)
7. Eisenhauer EA, 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
8. Schwartz LH, Bogaerts J, Ford R et al. Evaluation of lymph nodes with RECIST 1.1. Eur J Cancer: 2009; 45 261 267
9. Cheson BD, Horning SJ, Coiffier B et al. Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. NCI Sponsored International Working Group. J Clin Oncol: 1999; 17 1244
10. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol: 2007; 25 579 586 (Pubitemid 350002966)
11. Keil S, Plumhans C, Behrendt FF et al. Automated measurement of lymph nodes: a phantom study. Eur Radiol: 2009; 19 1079 1086
12. Puesken M, Juergens KU, 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
13. Marten K, Rummeny EJ, Engelke C. Computerassistierter Nachweis und automatisierte Volumetrie pulmonaler Rundherde in der Multislice-CT: Aktueller Stand und Perspektiven. Fortschr Röntgenstr: 2005; 177 188 196 (Pubitemid 40268926)
14. Fabel M, von Tengg-Kobligk H, Giesel FL et al. Semi-automated volumetric analysis of lymph node metastases in patients with malignant melanoma stage III/IV - a feasibility study. Eur Radiol: 2008; 18 1114 1122
15. Radiological Society of North America Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance In: Radiological Society of North America Web site: 24 11 2009; www.rsna.org/Research/qiba-intro.cfm
16. Redman HC, Glatstein E, Castellino RA et al. Computed tomography as an adjunct in the staging of Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. Radiology: 1977; 124 381 385 (Pubitemid 8155525)
17. Buerke B, Puesken M, Beyer F et al. Semiautomatic lymph node segmentation in multislice computed tomography: impact of slice thickness on segmentation quality, measurement precision, and interobserver variability. Invest Radiol: 2010; 45 82 88
18. Kuhnigk JM, Dicken V, Bornemann L et al. Morphological segmentation and partial volume analysis for volumetry of solid pulmonary lesions in thoracic CT scans. IEEE Trans Med Imaging: 2006; 25 417 434
19. 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 (Pubitemid 38181058)
20. James K, Eisenhauer E, Christian M et al. Measuring response in solid tumors: unidimensional versus bidimensional measurement. J Natl Cancer Inst: 1999; 91 523 528 (Pubitemid 29157060)
21. Buerke B, Puesken M, Muter S et al. Measurement accuracy and reproducibility of semiautomated metric and volumetric lymph node analysis in MDCT. Am J Roentgenol: 2010; 195 979 985
22. Zhao B, Schwartz LH, Moskowitz CS et al. Lung cancer: computerized quantification of tumor response - initial results. Radiology: 2006; 241 892 898 (Pubitemid 46190557)
23. Obuchowski NA. On the comparison of correlated proportions for clustered data. Stat Med: 1998; 17 1495 1507 (Pubitemid 28330346)
24. Jaffe TA, Wickersham NW, Sullivan DC. Quantitative imaging in oncology patients: Part 2, oncologists' opinions and expectations at major U. S. cancer centers. Am J Roentgenol: 2010; 195 W19 W30
25. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS et al. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol: 2007; 25 571 578 (Pubitemid 350002965)
26. Fabel M, Bolte H, von Tengg-Kobligk H et al. Semi-automated volumetric analysis of lymph node metastases during follow-up-initial results. Eur Radiol: 2011; 21 683 692
27. Cheson BD. Staging and evaluation of the patient with lymphoma. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am: 2008; 22 825 837
28. Pien HH, Fischman AJ, Thrall JH et al. Using imaging biomarkers to accelerate drug development and clinical trials. Drug Discov Today: 2005; 10 259 266 (Pubitemid 40222219)
29. Frank R, Hargreaves R. Clinical biomarkers in drug discovery and development. Nat Rev Drug Discov: 2003; 2 566 580 (Pubitemid 37361748)
30. Clarke LP, Croft BS, Nordstrom R et al. Quantitative imaging for evaluation of response to cancer therapy. Transl Oncol: 2009; 2 195 197