用计算机软件评价乳房美容改变乳腺癌保守治疗美容效果(BCCT)。(核心)保乳手术后低分割全乳照射-多中心单臂验证性试验的补充分析:JCOG0906。

IF 2.9
Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) Pub Date : 2022-11-01 Epub Date: 2022-07-21 DOI:10.1007/s12282-022-01384-8
Miwako Nozaki, Yoshikazu Kagami, Mitsuhiro Takahashi, Ryunosuke Machida, Yuta Sekino, Taro Shibata, Yoshinori Ito, Yasumasa Nishimura, Teruki Teshima, Hiroki Ushijima, Yasushi Nagata, Yasuo Matsumoto, Tetsuo Akimoto, Kana Takahashi, Shigeyuki Murayama, Takashi Uno, Kayoko Tsujino, Yasushi Hamamoto, Keiichi Nakagawa, Takeshi Kodaira, Masahiro Hiraoka
{"title":"用计算机软件评价乳房美容改变乳腺癌保守治疗美容效果(BCCT)。(核心)保乳手术后低分割全乳照射-多中心单臂验证性试验的补充分析:JCOG0906。","authors":"Miwako Nozaki,&nbsp;Yoshikazu Kagami,&nbsp;Mitsuhiro Takahashi,&nbsp;Ryunosuke Machida,&nbsp;Yuta Sekino,&nbsp;Taro Shibata,&nbsp;Yoshinori Ito,&nbsp;Yasumasa Nishimura,&nbsp;Teruki Teshima,&nbsp;Hiroki Ushijima,&nbsp;Yasushi Nagata,&nbsp;Yasuo Matsumoto,&nbsp;Tetsuo Akimoto,&nbsp;Kana Takahashi,&nbsp;Shigeyuki Murayama,&nbsp;Takashi Uno,&nbsp;Kayoko Tsujino,&nbsp;Yasushi Hamamoto,&nbsp;Keiichi Nakagawa,&nbsp;Takeshi Kodaira,&nbsp;Masahiro Hiraoka","doi":"10.1007/s12282-022-01384-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A good cosmetic outcome has been defined as an important endpoint in breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Various evaluation methods have been studied, but the optimal method has yet to be identified. The present supplementary analysis of JCOG0906 focused on comparing evaluation methods for breast cosmetic outcomes following hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HFWBI) to examine whether a computer-software (the Breast Cancer Conservative Treatment cosmetic results [BCCT. core])-based program evaluation (CE) can be used for Asian women in clinical trials of BCT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Of 306 women, 292 underwent institutional evaluation (IE) for breast cosmetic outcomes before (pre) and 3 years after (post) HFWBI using a 4-point scale (excellent/good/fair/poor), and they were evaluated by CE and a central panel evaluation (PE) on the same scale using 292 pairs of pre/post-HFWBI photographs. PE was performed twice by consensus of the same two experts with a 3-year interval. CE was assessed individually by two radiation oncologists, an expert and a non-expert. Intra-observer variability and inter-observer variability were calculated using the kappa (k) and weighted kappa (wk) statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The agreement between the first and second PE using pre/post-HFWBI photographs was moderate (k = 0.60, wk = 0.64. k = 0.53, wk = 0.60). The agreement between the expert and non-expert on CE was substantial (k = 0.72, wk = 0.76. k = 0.72, wk = 0.77). The inter-observer variability of CE was smaller than the intra-observer variability of PE.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CE with BCCT. core was considered a reproducible and an appropriate evaluation method for Asian women in clinical trials of BCT, when breast cosmetic changes were compared between pre/post therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":520574,"journal":{"name":"Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)","volume":" ","pages":"1042-1049"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of breast cosmetic changes with a computer-software; the breast cancer conservative treatment cosmetic results (BCCT. core) in hypofractionated whole breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery-supplementary analysis of multicenter single-arm confirmatory trial: JCOG0906.\",\"authors\":\"Miwako Nozaki,&nbsp;Yoshikazu Kagami,&nbsp;Mitsuhiro Takahashi,&nbsp;Ryunosuke Machida,&nbsp;Yuta Sekino,&nbsp;Taro Shibata,&nbsp;Yoshinori Ito,&nbsp;Yasumasa Nishimura,&nbsp;Teruki Teshima,&nbsp;Hiroki Ushijima,&nbsp;Yasushi Nagata,&nbsp;Yasuo Matsumoto,&nbsp;Tetsuo Akimoto,&nbsp;Kana Takahashi,&nbsp;Shigeyuki Murayama,&nbsp;Takashi Uno,&nbsp;Kayoko Tsujino,&nbsp;Yasushi Hamamoto,&nbsp;Keiichi Nakagawa,&nbsp;Takeshi Kodaira,&nbsp;Masahiro Hiraoka\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12282-022-01384-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A good cosmetic outcome has been defined as an important endpoint in breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Various evaluation methods have been studied, but the optimal method has yet to be identified. The present supplementary analysis of JCOG0906 focused on comparing evaluation methods for breast cosmetic outcomes following hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HFWBI) to examine whether a computer-software (the Breast Cancer Conservative Treatment cosmetic results [BCCT. core])-based program evaluation (CE) can be used for Asian women in clinical trials of BCT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Of 306 women, 292 underwent institutional evaluation (IE) for breast cosmetic outcomes before (pre) and 3 years after (post) HFWBI using a 4-point scale (excellent/good/fair/poor), and they were evaluated by CE and a central panel evaluation (PE) on the same scale using 292 pairs of pre/post-HFWBI photographs. PE was performed twice by consensus of the same two experts with a 3-year interval. CE was assessed individually by two radiation oncologists, an expert and a non-expert. Intra-observer variability and inter-observer variability were calculated using the kappa (k) and weighted kappa (wk) statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The agreement between the first and second PE using pre/post-HFWBI photographs was moderate (k = 0.60, wk = 0.64. k = 0.53, wk = 0.60). The agreement between the expert and non-expert on CE was substantial (k = 0.72, wk = 0.76. k = 0.72, wk = 0.77). The inter-observer variability of CE was smaller than the intra-observer variability of PE.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CE with BCCT. core was considered a reproducible and an appropriate evaluation method for Asian women in clinical trials of BCT, when breast cosmetic changes were compared between pre/post therapy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520574,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1042-1049\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-022-01384-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/7/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-022-01384-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/7/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:良好的美容结果已被定义为保乳治疗(BCT)的重要终点。人们研究了各种评价方法,但尚未找到最优的方法。本JCOG0906的补充分析侧重于比较低分割全乳照射(HFWBI)后乳房美容结果的评估方法,以检查计算机软件是否(乳腺癌保守治疗美容结果[BCCT])。基于程序评估(CE)的方法可用于亚洲女性的BCT临床试验。方法:306名女性中,292名在HFWBI前(术前)和术后3年(术后)采用4分制(优/好/一般/差)对乳房美容结果进行机构评价(IE),并使用292对HFWBI前/后照片采用CE和相同量表的中央小组评价(PE)进行评价。经同一两位专家一致同意,每隔3年进行两次PE。CE由两名放射肿瘤学家分别评估,一名专家和一名非专家。使用kappa (k)和加权kappa (wk)统计量计算观察者内变异性和观察者间变异性。结果:使用hfwbi前后照片的第一次和第二次PE之间的一致性中等(k = 0.60, wk = 0.64)。K = 0.53,周= 0.60)。专家和非专家在CE上的一致性是实质性的(k = 0.72, wk = 0.76)。K = 0.72,周= 0.77)。CE的观察者间变异性小于PE的观察者内变异性。结论:CE配合BCCT。当比较治疗前后乳房美容变化时,core被认为是一种可重复的、适合亚洲女性BCT临床试验的评估方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of breast cosmetic changes with a computer-software; the breast cancer conservative treatment cosmetic results (BCCT. core) in hypofractionated whole breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery-supplementary analysis of multicenter single-arm confirmatory trial: JCOG0906.

Background: A good cosmetic outcome has been defined as an important endpoint in breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Various evaluation methods have been studied, but the optimal method has yet to be identified. The present supplementary analysis of JCOG0906 focused on comparing evaluation methods for breast cosmetic outcomes following hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HFWBI) to examine whether a computer-software (the Breast Cancer Conservative Treatment cosmetic results [BCCT. core])-based program evaluation (CE) can be used for Asian women in clinical trials of BCT.

Methods: Of 306 women, 292 underwent institutional evaluation (IE) for breast cosmetic outcomes before (pre) and 3 years after (post) HFWBI using a 4-point scale (excellent/good/fair/poor), and they were evaluated by CE and a central panel evaluation (PE) on the same scale using 292 pairs of pre/post-HFWBI photographs. PE was performed twice by consensus of the same two experts with a 3-year interval. CE was assessed individually by two radiation oncologists, an expert and a non-expert. Intra-observer variability and inter-observer variability were calculated using the kappa (k) and weighted kappa (wk) statistics.

Results: The agreement between the first and second PE using pre/post-HFWBI photographs was moderate (k = 0.60, wk = 0.64. k = 0.53, wk = 0.60). The agreement between the expert and non-expert on CE was substantial (k = 0.72, wk = 0.76. k = 0.72, wk = 0.77). The inter-observer variability of CE was smaller than the intra-observer variability of PE.

Conclusion: CE with BCCT. core was considered a reproducible and an appropriate evaluation method for Asian women in clinical trials of BCT, when breast cosmetic changes were compared between pre/post therapy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信