Saeed Mohammadzadeh, Alisa Mohebbi, Ali Abdi, Afshin Mohammadi
{"title":"评估肝细胞癌经动脉化疗栓塞反应的RECIST和mRECIST标准的读者间共识。","authors":"Saeed Mohammadzadeh, Alisa Mohebbi, Ali Abdi, Afshin Mohammadi","doi":"10.1186/s12880-025-01688-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the reproducibilities of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and modified RECIST (mRECIST) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 105 consecutive patients with confirmed HCC recruited from November 2002 to June 2012. The study protocol has been pre-registered at ( https://osf.io/nxg4q/ ) on the Open Science Framework (OSF) platform. Patients with pre-procedural and follow-up CT scans who had solely received TACE were included. The tumor response evaluation to TACE was conducted using RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST guidelines. Three experienced board-certified abdominal radiologists interpreted CT scans.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For pre-procedure CT, the agreement was more excellent when using RECIST guidelines with a \"marginally significant\" p-value of 0.056. This trend continued for post-procedural CT scans, with RECIST again showing significantly higher agreement with a p-value of 0.001. When evaluating the four categories of response, Gwet's coefficient was 0.90 (CI = 0.83 to 0.97) for RECIST and 0.80 (CI = 0.63 to 0.90) for mRECIST. Conversely, the Fleiss Kappa analysis demonstrated a higher agreement for the mRECIST guideline. There was an insignificant difference in RECIST and mRECIST guidelines inter-reader agreement when categorizing the tumor response with a p-value of 0.101.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both guidelines' inter-reader reproducibility in assessing tumor response through CT after the TACE procedure was excellent, with RECIST's reproducibility being very slightly better.</p>","PeriodicalId":9020,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Imaging","volume":"25 1","pages":"148"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12049784/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inter-reader agreement of RECIST and mRECIST criteria for assessing response to transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma.\",\"authors\":\"Saeed Mohammadzadeh, Alisa Mohebbi, Ali Abdi, Afshin Mohammadi\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12880-025-01688-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the reproducibilities of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and modified RECIST (mRECIST) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 105 consecutive patients with confirmed HCC recruited from November 2002 to June 2012. The study protocol has been pre-registered at ( https://osf.io/nxg4q/ ) on the Open Science Framework (OSF) platform. Patients with pre-procedural and follow-up CT scans who had solely received TACE were included. The tumor response evaluation to TACE was conducted using RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST guidelines. Three experienced board-certified abdominal radiologists interpreted CT scans.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For pre-procedure CT, the agreement was more excellent when using RECIST guidelines with a \\\"marginally significant\\\" p-value of 0.056. This trend continued for post-procedural CT scans, with RECIST again showing significantly higher agreement with a p-value of 0.001. When evaluating the four categories of response, Gwet's coefficient was 0.90 (CI = 0.83 to 0.97) for RECIST and 0.80 (CI = 0.63 to 0.90) for mRECIST. Conversely, the Fleiss Kappa analysis demonstrated a higher agreement for the mRECIST guideline. There was an insignificant difference in RECIST and mRECIST guidelines inter-reader agreement when categorizing the tumor response with a p-value of 0.101.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both guidelines' inter-reader reproducibility in assessing tumor response through CT after the TACE procedure was excellent, with RECIST's reproducibility being very slightly better.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9020,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Imaging\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"148\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12049784/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-025-01688-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-025-01688-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Inter-reader agreement of RECIST and mRECIST criteria for assessing response to transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma.
Objectives: To evaluate the reproducibilities of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and modified RECIST (mRECIST) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT).
Methods: This retrospective study included 105 consecutive patients with confirmed HCC recruited from November 2002 to June 2012. The study protocol has been pre-registered at ( https://osf.io/nxg4q/ ) on the Open Science Framework (OSF) platform. Patients with pre-procedural and follow-up CT scans who had solely received TACE were included. The tumor response evaluation to TACE was conducted using RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST guidelines. Three experienced board-certified abdominal radiologists interpreted CT scans.
Results: For pre-procedure CT, the agreement was more excellent when using RECIST guidelines with a "marginally significant" p-value of 0.056. This trend continued for post-procedural CT scans, with RECIST again showing significantly higher agreement with a p-value of 0.001. When evaluating the four categories of response, Gwet's coefficient was 0.90 (CI = 0.83 to 0.97) for RECIST and 0.80 (CI = 0.63 to 0.90) for mRECIST. Conversely, the Fleiss Kappa analysis demonstrated a higher agreement for the mRECIST guideline. There was an insignificant difference in RECIST and mRECIST guidelines inter-reader agreement when categorizing the tumor response with a p-value of 0.101.
Conclusion: Both guidelines' inter-reader reproducibility in assessing tumor response through CT after the TACE procedure was excellent, with RECIST's reproducibility being very slightly better.
期刊介绍:
BMC Medical Imaging is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in the development, evaluation, and use of imaging techniques and image processing tools to diagnose and manage disease.