Do the variations in ROI placement technique have influence for prostate ADC measurements?

IF 0.9 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Yoshiko Ueno, T. Tamada, K. Sofue, Y. Urase, N. Hinata, M. Fujisawa, Takamichi Murakami
{"title":"Do the variations in ROI placement technique have influence for prostate ADC measurements?","authors":"Yoshiko Ueno, T. Tamada, K. Sofue, Y. Urase, N. Hinata, M. Fujisawa, Takamichi Murakami","doi":"10.1177/20584601221086500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Prostate apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values calculated from diffusion-weighted imaging have been used for evaluating prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness. However, the way of measuring ADC values has varied depending on the study. Purpose To investigate inter- and intra-reader variability and diagnostic performance of three kinds of shaped 2D regions of interests (ROIs) for tumor ADC measurements in PCa. Material and Methods Seventy-four patients with PCa undergoing 3-T MRI before surgery were included. Histologic findings from radical prostatectomy specimens were reviewed to define each patient’s dominant tumor. Three readers independently measured the tumor ADCs using three different ROI methods: freehand, large-circle, and small-circles ROIs. Readers repeated measurements after 3 weeks. Bland-Altman analysis was performed to evaluate the inter- and intra-reader variability. Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis was used for assessment of tumor aggressiveness for PCa. Results For intra-reader and inter-reader variability, the mean coefficient of repeatability for freehand ROIs, large-circle ROIs, and small-circles ROIs were as follows: 13.7%, 12.4%, and 11.5%; 9.4%, 9.7%, and 9.5%. For differentiating Gleason score (GS) = 3 + 3 from GS ≥ 3 + 4 tumors, the area under the curves were 0.90 for freehand ROIs, 0.89 for large-circle ROIs, and 0.94 small-circles ROIs (p = 0.31). Conclusion The variations in ROI method did not have a major influence on intra-reader or inter-reader reproducibility or diagnostic performance for prostate ADC measurements.","PeriodicalId":72063,"journal":{"name":"Acta radiologica open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta radiologica open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20584601221086500","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background Prostate apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values calculated from diffusion-weighted imaging have been used for evaluating prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness. However, the way of measuring ADC values has varied depending on the study. Purpose To investigate inter- and intra-reader variability and diagnostic performance of three kinds of shaped 2D regions of interests (ROIs) for tumor ADC measurements in PCa. Material and Methods Seventy-four patients with PCa undergoing 3-T MRI before surgery were included. Histologic findings from radical prostatectomy specimens were reviewed to define each patient’s dominant tumor. Three readers independently measured the tumor ADCs using three different ROI methods: freehand, large-circle, and small-circles ROIs. Readers repeated measurements after 3 weeks. Bland-Altman analysis was performed to evaluate the inter- and intra-reader variability. Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis was used for assessment of tumor aggressiveness for PCa. Results For intra-reader and inter-reader variability, the mean coefficient of repeatability for freehand ROIs, large-circle ROIs, and small-circles ROIs were as follows: 13.7%, 12.4%, and 11.5%; 9.4%, 9.7%, and 9.5%. For differentiating Gleason score (GS) = 3 + 3 from GS ≥ 3 + 4 tumors, the area under the curves were 0.90 for freehand ROIs, 0.89 for large-circle ROIs, and 0.94 small-circles ROIs (p = 0.31). Conclusion The variations in ROI method did not have a major influence on intra-reader or inter-reader reproducibility or diagnostic performance for prostate ADC measurements.
ROI放置技术的变化对前列腺ADC测量有影响吗?
背景通过扩散加权成像计算的前列腺表观扩散系数(ADC)值已用于评估前列腺癌症(PCa)的侵袭性。然而,测量ADC值的方式因研究而异。目的研究三种形状的二维感兴趣区域(ROI)在前列腺癌中用于肿瘤ADC测量的读卡器间和读卡器内变异性和诊断性能。材料与方法74例前列腺癌患者术前接受3-T MRI检查。对根治性前列腺切除术标本的组织学检查结果进行回顾,以确定每位患者的主要肿瘤。三位读者使用三种不同的ROI方法独立测量肿瘤ADC:徒手、大圆和小圆ROI。读者在3周后重复测量。Bland-Altman分析用于评估读者之间和读者内部的变异性。受试者操作特征分析用于评估前列腺癌的肿瘤侵袭性。结果对于读者内部和读者之间的变异性,徒手ROI、大圆ROI和小圆ROI的平均重复系数分别为:13.7%、12.4%和11.5%;9.4%、9.7%和9.5%。对于区分Gleason评分(GS)=3+3和GS≥3+4的肿瘤,徒手ROI的曲线下面积为0.90,大圆ROI为0.89,小圆ROI为0.94(p=0.31)。结论ROI方法的变化对前列腺ADC测量的阅读器内或阅读器间再现性或诊断性能没有重大影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信