Observer variability for classification of pulmonary nodules on low-dose CT Images and its effect on nodule management1

Radiology

Volumn 277, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 863-871

  Van Riel, Sarah J ^a   Sánchez, Clara I ^a   Bankier, Alexander A ^b   Naidich, David P ^c   Verschakelen, Johnny ^d   Scholten, Ernst T ^a   De Jong, Pim A ^e   Jacobs, Colin ^a   Van Rikxoort, Eva ^a   Peters Bax, Liesbeth ^a   Snoeren, Miranda ^a   Prokop, Mathias ^a   Van Ginneken, Bram ^a   Schaefer Prokop, Cornelia ^a,f  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d DEPARTMENT OF IMAGING AND PATHOLOGY   (Belgium)

^e UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^f MEANDER MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE DISPLAY; IMAGE QUALITY; LUNG NODULE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; MULTIPLE PULMONARY NODULES; RADIOGRAPHY;

HUMANS; MULTIPLE PULMONARY NODULES; OBSERVER VARIATION; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84948732335     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2015142700     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. MacMahon H, Austin JH, Gamsu G, et al. Guidelines for management of small pulmothenary nodules detected on CT scans: a statement from the Fleischner Society. Radiology 2005;237(2):395-400.
2. Naidich DP, Bankier AA, MacMahon H, et al. Recommendations for the management of subsolid pulmonary nodules detected at CT: a statement from the Fleischner Society. Radiology 2013;266(1):304-317.
3. Manos D, Seely JM, Taylor J, Borgaonkar J, Roberts HC, Mayo JR. The Lung Reporting and Data System (LU-RADS): a proposal for computed tomography screening. Can Assoc Radiol J 2014;65(2):121-134.
4. Lung-RADS Assessment Categories. Version 1. 0. American College of Radiology. Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) Web site. http://www. acr. org/Quality-Safety/Resources/LungRADS. Published April 28, 2014. Accessed September 15, 2014.
5. Gould MK, Donington J, Lynch WR, et al. Evaluation of individuals with pulmonary nodules: when is it lung cancer? Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 2013;143(5 Suppl):e93S-e120S.
6. Lee KH, Goo JM, Park SJ, et al. Correlation between the size of the solid component on thin-section CT and the invasive component on pathology in small lung adenocarcinomas manifesting as ground-glass nodules. J Thorac Oncol 2014;9(1):74-82.
7. Ohde Y, Nagai K, Yoshida J, et al. The proportion of consolidation to ground-glass opacity on high resolution CT is a good predictor for distinguishing the population of non-invasive peripheral adenocarcinoma. Lung Cancer 2003;42(3):303-310.
8. Nakata M, Sawada S, Yamashita M, et al. Objective radiologic analysis of groundglass opacity aimed at curative limited resection for small peripheral non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005;129(6):1226-1231.
9. Aoki T, Tomoda Y, Watanabe H, et al. Peripheral lung adenocarcinoma: correlation of thin-section CT findings with histologic prognostic factors and survival. Radiology 2001;220(3):803-809.
10. Kim EA, Johkoh T, Lee KS, et al. Quantification of ground-glass opacity on highresolution CT of small peripheral adenocarcinoma of the lung: pathologic and prognostic implications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177(6):1417-1422.
11. Kobayashi N, Toyooka S, Ichimura K, et al. Non-BAC component but not epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutation is associated with poor outcomes in small adenocarcinoma of the lung. J Thorac Oncol 2008;3(7):704-710.
12. Vazquez M, Carter D, Brambilla E, et al. Solitary and multiple resected adenocarcinomas after CT screening for lung cancer: histopathologic features and their prognostic implications. Lung Cancer 2009; 64(2):148-154.
13. Gierada DS, Pilgram TK, Ford M, et al. Lung cancer: interobserver agreement on interpretation of pulmonary findings at lowdose CT screening. Radiology 2008;246(1): 265-272.
14. Marten K, Auer F, Schmidt S, Kohl G, Rummeny EJ, Engelke C. Inadequacy of manual measurements compared to automated CT volumetry in assessment of treatment response of pulmonary metastases using RECIST criteria. Eur Radiol 2006;16 (4):781-790.
15. Singh S, Pinsky P, Fineberg NS, et al. Evaluation of reader variability in the interpretation of follow-up CT scans at lung cancer screening. Radiology 2011;259(1):263-270.
16. van Klaveren RJ, Oudkerk M, Prokop M, et al. Management of lung nodules detected by volume CT scanning. N Engl J Med 2009; 361(23):2221-2229.
17. Ru Zhao Y, Xie X, de Koning HJ, Mali WP, Vliegenthart R, Oudkerk M. NELSON lung cancer screening study. Cancer Imaging 2011;11(Spec No A):S79-S84.
18. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33(1):159-174.
19. Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, Mirtcheva R, et al. CT screening for lung cancer: frequency and significance of part-solid and nonsolid nodules. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178(5): 1053-1057.
20. Hansell DM, Bankier AA, MacMahon H, McLoud TC, Müller NL, Remy J. Fleischner Society: glossary of terms for thoracic imaging. Radiology 2008;246(3):697-722.
21. Kakinuma R, Kodama K, Yamada K, et al. Performance evaluation of 4 measuring methods of ground-glass opacities for predicting the 5-year relapse-free survival of patients with peripheral nonsmall cell lung cancer: a multicenter study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2008;32(5):792-798.
22. Takamochi K, Nagai K, Yoshida J, et al. Pathologic N0 status in pulmonary adenocarcinoma is predictable by combining serum carcinoembryonic antigen level and computed tomographic findings. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2001;122(2):325-330.
23. Okada M, Nishio W, Sakamoto T, Uchino K, Tsubota N. Discrepancy of computed tomographic image between lung and mediastinal windows as a prognostic implication in small lung adenocarcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg 2003;76(6):1828-1832; discussion 1832.
24. Park CM, Goo JM, Kim TJ, et al. Pulmonary nodular ground-glass opacities in patients with extrapulmonary cancers: what is their clinical significance and how can we determine whether they are malignant or benign lesions? Chest 2008;133(6):1402-1409.
25. Penn A, Ma M, Chou BB, Tseng JR, Phan P. Inter-reader variability when applying the 2013 Fleischner guidelines for potential solitary subsolid lung nodules. Acta Radiol 2014 Oct 7. [Epub ahead of print]