WIDEN: A tool for medical image management in multicenter clinical trials

Clinical Trials

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 355-361

  Chauvie, Stéphane ^a,b   Biggi, Alberto ^a   Stancu, Alexandru ^a   Cerello, Piergiorgio ^b   Cavallo, Anna ^a   Fallanca, Federico ^c   Ficola, Umberto ^d,e   Gregianin, Michele ^a   Guerra, Ugo Paolo ^f   Chiaravalloti, Agostino ^g   Schillaci, Orazio ^g,h   Gallamini, Andrea ^a  

^a S CROCE E CARLE HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^b SEZIONE DI TORINO   (Italy)

^c SAN RAFFAELE HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^d LA MADDALENA CANCER CENTER   (Italy)

^e VENETO INSTITUTE OF ONCOLOGY IOV IRCCS   (Italy)

^f Bergamo Hospital   (Italy)

^g UNIVERSITY OF ROME TOR VERGATA   (Italy)

^h IRCCS NEUROMED   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORINE 18; GALLIUM 68;

ARTICLE; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER PATIENT; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIGITAL IMAGING AND COMMUNICATIONS IN MEDICINE; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HODGKIN DISEASE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL AUDIT; MULTICENTER STUDY; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RATING SCALE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; WEB BASED IMAGING DIAGNOSIS BY EXPERT NETWORK; WEB BROWSER; WORKFLOW; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); INFORMATION SYSTEM; PROCEDURES;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HUMANS; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84901247635     PISSN: 17407745     EISSN: 17407753     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1740774514525690     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging of cancer with positron emission tomography. Nat Rev Cancer. 2002 ; 2: 683-93
2. Juweid ME, Cheson B. Positron-emission tomography and assessment of cancer therapy. N Engl J Med. 2006 ; 6354: 496-507
3. Juweid ME, Cheson B. Role of positron emission tomography in lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2005 ; 23: 4577-80
4. Munker R, Glass J, Griffeth LK, et al. Contribution of PET imaging to the initial staging and prognosis of patients with Hodgkin's disease. Ann Oncol. 2004 ; 15: 1669-704
5. Hoh CK, Glaspy J, Rosen P, et al. Whole-body FDG-PET for staging of Hodgkin's disease and lymphoma. J Nucl Med. 1997 ; 38: 343-48
6. Jerusalem G, Geguin Y, Fassotte MF, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for post-treatment evaluation in Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma has higher diagnostic and prognostic value than classical computed tomography scan imaging. Blood. 1999 ; 94: 429-33
7. Spaepen K, Stoobants S, Dupont P, et al. Can positron emission tomography with [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose after first-line treatment distinguish Hodgkin's disease patients who need additional therapy from others in whom additional therapy would mean avoidable toxicity?. Br J Haematol. 2001 ; 115: 272-78
8. De Wit M, Bohuslavizki KH, Buchert R, et al. 18FDG-PET following treatment as valid predictor for disease-free survival in Hodgkin's lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2001 ; 12: 29-37
9. Zijlstra JM, Lindauer-van der Werf G, Hoekstra OS, et al. 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for post-treatment evaluation of malignant lymphoma: A systematic review. Haematologica. 2006 ; 91: 522-29
10. Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, et al. FDG-PET after two cycles of chemotherapy predicts treatment failure and progression-free survival in Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2006 ; 107: 52-59
11. Gallamini A, Rigacci L, Merli F, et al. The predictive value of positron emission tomography scanning performed after two courses of standard therapy on treatment outcome in advanced stage Hodgkin's disease. Haematologica. 2006 ; 9: 475-81
12. Terasawa T, Lau J, Bardet S, et al. Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for interim response assessment of advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: A systematic review. J Clin Oncol. 2009 ; 27: 1906-14
13. Gallamini A, Hutchings M, Rigacci L, et al. Early interim 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is prognostically superior to International Prognostic Score in advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma. A report from a joint Italian-Danish study. J Clin Oncol. 2007 ; 25: 3746-52
14. Hutchings M, Barrington SF. PET/CT for therapy response assessment in lymphoma. J Nucl Med. 2009 ; 50: 21S - 30S
15. ClinicalTrials.gov (Gruppo Italiano Terapie Innovative nei Linfomi (GITIL)). Positron emission tomography (PET)-adapted chemotherapy in advanced Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Available at: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/ NCT00795613 (2008, accessed 8 October 2013).
16. Gallamini A, Patti C, Viviani S, et al. Early chemotherapy intensification with BEACOPP in advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma patients with a interim-PET positive after two ABVD courses. Br J Haematol. 2011 ; 152: 551-60
17. Biggi A, Gallamini A, Chauvie S, et al. International validation study for interim PET in ABVD-treated, advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma: Interpretation criteria and concordance rate among reviewers. J Nucl Med. 2013 ; 54 (5). 683-90
18. A randomised phase III trial to assess response adapted therapy using FDG-PET imaging in patients with newly diagnoses, advanced Hodgkin lymphoma. Available at: http://www.haematologyclinicaltrials.co.uk/trials/24 (2011, accessed 8 October 2013).
19. Meignan M, Gallamini A, Haioun C. Report on the first international workshop on interim PET scan in Lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma. 2009 ; 50: 1257-60
20. Kagadis GC, Kloukinas C, Philbin J, et al. Cloud computing in medical imaging. Med Phys. 2013 2013 ;:
21. NEMA Standards Publication NU 2-2007 Performance Measurements of Positron Emission Tomographs. Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association ; 2007 :
22. NEMA Standards Publication NU 2-2001 Performance Measurements of Positron Emission Tomographs. Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association ; 2001 :
23. ACR Technical Standard for Medical Nuclear Physics Performance Monitoring of PET Imaging Equipment. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology ; 2006 :
24. ACR Technical Standard for Medical Nuclear Physics Performance Monitoring of PET/CT Imaging Equipment. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology ; 2008 :
25. Busemann Sokole E, Płachcínska A, et al. Routine quality control recommendations for nuclear medicine instrumentation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010 ; 37: 662-71
26. Bombardieri E, Aktolun C, Baum RP, et al. FDG-PET: Procedure guidelines for tumour imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003 ; 30: 115-24
27. Bidgood WD, Horii SC. Introduction to the ACR-NEMA DICOM standard. Radiographics. 1992 ; 12: 345-55
28. Paul J, Seib R, Prescott T. The Internet and clinical trials: Background, online resources, examples and issues. J Med Internet Res. 2005 ; 16: e5
29. Guide to user requirements definition phase. European Space Agency, Paris. 1994 ;:
30. Barrington SF, Qian W, Somer EJ, et al. Concordance between four European centres of PET reporting criteria designed for use in multicentre trials in Hodgkin lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010 ; 37: 1824-33
31. Cohen J. A coefficient for agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960 ; 20: 37-46
32. Hayes AF, Krippendorff K. Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Commun Method Meas. 2007 ; 1: 77-89
33. Dodd LE, Korn EL, Freidlin B, et al. Blinded independent central review of progression-free survival in phase III clinical trials: Important design element or unnecessary expense?. J Clin Oncol. 2008 ; 22: 3791-96
34. Barrington SF, Mackewn JE, Schleyer P, et al. Establishment of a UK-wide network to facilitate the acquisition of quality assured FDG-PET data for clinical trials in lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2011 ; 22: 739-45
35. Meignan M, Itti E, Bardet S, et al. Development and application of a real-time on-line blinded independent central review of interim PET scans to determine treatment allocation in lymphoma trials. J Clin Oncol. 2009 ; 27: 2739-41
36. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1997 ; 33: 159-74