Determining the Variability of Lesion Size Measurements from CT Patient Data Sets Acquired under “No Change” Conditions

PURPOSE: To determine the variability of lesion size measurements in computed tomography data sets of patients imaged under a “no change” (“coffee break”) condition and to determine the impact of two reading paradigms on measurement variability. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Using data sets from 32 non-sma...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Michael F. McNitt-Gray, Grace Hyun Kim, Binsheng Zhao, Lawrence H. Schwartz, David Clunie, Kristin Cohen, Nicholas Petrick, Charles Fenimore, Z.Q. John Lu, Andrew J. Buckler
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2015-02-01
Series:Translational Oncology
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1936523315000029
id doaj-516d6e43d4f341c285b0bfe88210419f
record_format Article
spelling doaj-516d6e43d4f341c285b0bfe88210419f2020-11-24T23:31:26ZengElsevierTranslational Oncology1936-52331944-71242015-02-0181556410.1016/j.tranon.2015.01.001Determining the Variability of Lesion Size Measurements from CT Patient Data Sets Acquired under “No Change” ConditionsMichael F. McNitt-Gray0Grace Hyun Kim1Binsheng Zhao2Lawrence H. Schwartz3David Clunie4Kristin Cohen5Nicholas Petrick6Charles Fenimore7Z.Q. John Lu8Andrew J. Buckler9David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USADavid Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USAColumbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USAColumbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USAPixel Med Publishing, LLC, Bangor, PA, USA (formerly with Core Lab Partners, Inc, Princeton, NJ)Janssen Pharmaceutical Research and Development (formerly with Core Lab Partners, Inc, Princeton, NJ), Titusville, NJ, USACenter for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USAThe Image-Quality Measurement Consultancy, Gaithersburg, MD, USA (formerly with National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD)National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, USAElucid Bioimaging Inc, Wenham, MA, USA PURPOSE: To determine the variability of lesion size measurements in computed tomography data sets of patients imaged under a “no change” (“coffee break”) condition and to determine the impact of two reading paradigms on measurement variability. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Using data sets from 32 non-small cell lung cancer patients scanned twice within 15 minutes (“no change”), measurements were performed by five radiologists in two phases: (1) independent reading of each computed tomography dataset (timepoint): (2) a locked, sequential reading of datasets. Readers performed measurements using several sizing methods, including one-dimensional (1D) longest in-slice dimension and 3D semi-automated segmented volume. Change in size was estimated by comparing measurements performed on both timepoints for the same lesion, for each reader and each measurement method. For each reading paradigm, results were pooled across lesions, across readers, and across both readers and lesions, for each measurement method. RESULTS: The mean percent difference (±SD) when pooled across both readers and lesions for 1D and 3D measurements extracted from contours was 2.8 ± 22.2% and 23.4 ± 105.0%, respectively, for the independent reads. For the locked, sequential reads, the mean percent differences (±SD) reduced to 2.52 ± 14.2% and 7.4 ± 44.2% for the 1D and 3D measurements, respectively. CONCLUSION: Even under a “no change” condition between scans, there is variation in lesion size measurements due to repeat scans and variations in reader, lesion, and measurement method. This variation is reduced when using a locked, sequential reading paradigm compared to an independent reading paradigm. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1936523315000029
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Michael F. McNitt-Gray
Grace Hyun Kim
Binsheng Zhao
Lawrence H. Schwartz
David Clunie
Kristin Cohen
Nicholas Petrick
Charles Fenimore
Z.Q. John Lu
Andrew J. Buckler
spellingShingle Michael F. McNitt-Gray
Grace Hyun Kim
Binsheng Zhao
Lawrence H. Schwartz
David Clunie
Kristin Cohen
Nicholas Petrick
Charles Fenimore
Z.Q. John Lu
Andrew J. Buckler
Determining the Variability of Lesion Size Measurements from CT Patient Data Sets Acquired under “No Change” Conditions
Translational Oncology
author_facet Michael F. McNitt-Gray
Grace Hyun Kim
Binsheng Zhao
Lawrence H. Schwartz
David Clunie
Kristin Cohen
Nicholas Petrick
Charles Fenimore
Z.Q. John Lu
Andrew J. Buckler
author_sort Michael F. McNitt-Gray
title Determining the Variability of Lesion Size Measurements from CT Patient Data Sets Acquired under “No Change” Conditions
title_short Determining the Variability of Lesion Size Measurements from CT Patient Data Sets Acquired under “No Change” Conditions
title_full Determining the Variability of Lesion Size Measurements from CT Patient Data Sets Acquired under “No Change” Conditions
title_fullStr Determining the Variability of Lesion Size Measurements from CT Patient Data Sets Acquired under “No Change” Conditions
title_full_unstemmed Determining the Variability of Lesion Size Measurements from CT Patient Data Sets Acquired under “No Change” Conditions
title_sort determining the variability of lesion size measurements from ct patient data sets acquired under “no change” conditions
publisher Elsevier
series Translational Oncology
issn 1936-5233
1944-7124
publishDate 2015-02-01
description PURPOSE: To determine the variability of lesion size measurements in computed tomography data sets of patients imaged under a “no change” (“coffee break”) condition and to determine the impact of two reading paradigms on measurement variability. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Using data sets from 32 non-small cell lung cancer patients scanned twice within 15 minutes (“no change”), measurements were performed by five radiologists in two phases: (1) independent reading of each computed tomography dataset (timepoint): (2) a locked, sequential reading of datasets. Readers performed measurements using several sizing methods, including one-dimensional (1D) longest in-slice dimension and 3D semi-automated segmented volume. Change in size was estimated by comparing measurements performed on both timepoints for the same lesion, for each reader and each measurement method. For each reading paradigm, results were pooled across lesions, across readers, and across both readers and lesions, for each measurement method. RESULTS: The mean percent difference (±SD) when pooled across both readers and lesions for 1D and 3D measurements extracted from contours was 2.8 ± 22.2% and 23.4 ± 105.0%, respectively, for the independent reads. For the locked, sequential reads, the mean percent differences (±SD) reduced to 2.52 ± 14.2% and 7.4 ± 44.2% for the 1D and 3D measurements, respectively. CONCLUSION: Even under a “no change” condition between scans, there is variation in lesion size measurements due to repeat scans and variations in reader, lesion, and measurement method. This variation is reduced when using a locked, sequential reading paradigm compared to an independent reading paradigm.
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1936523315000029
work_keys_str_mv AT michaelfmcnittgray determiningthevariabilityoflesionsizemeasurementsfromctpatientdatasetsacquiredundernochangeconditions
AT gracehyunkim determiningthevariabilityoflesionsizemeasurementsfromctpatientdatasetsacquiredundernochangeconditions
AT binshengzhao determiningthevariabilityoflesionsizemeasurementsfromctpatientdatasetsacquiredundernochangeconditions
AT lawrencehschwartz determiningthevariabilityoflesionsizemeasurementsfromctpatientdatasetsacquiredundernochangeconditions
AT davidclunie determiningthevariabilityoflesionsizemeasurementsfromctpatientdatasetsacquiredundernochangeconditions
AT kristincohen determiningthevariabilityoflesionsizemeasurementsfromctpatientdatasetsacquiredundernochangeconditions
AT nicholaspetrick determiningthevariabilityoflesionsizemeasurementsfromctpatientdatasetsacquiredundernochangeconditions
AT charlesfenimore determiningthevariabilityoflesionsizemeasurementsfromctpatientdatasetsacquiredundernochangeconditions
AT zqjohnlu determiningthevariabilityoflesionsizemeasurementsfromctpatientdatasetsacquiredundernochangeconditions
AT andrewjbuckler determiningthevariabilityoflesionsizemeasurementsfromctpatientdatasetsacquiredundernochangeconditions
_version_ 1725537941282881536