Background Validation of the 2016 RANO MRI scorecard for leptomeningeal metastasis failed for multiple reasons. Accordingly, this joint EORTC Brain Tumor Group and RANO effort sought to prospectively validate a revised MRI scorecard for response assessment in leptomeningeal metastasis. Methods Coded paired cerebrospinal MRI of 20 patients with leptomeningeal metastases from solid cancers at baseline and follow-up after treatment and instructions for assessment were provided via the EORTC imaging platform. The Kappa coefficient was used to evaluate the inter-observer pairwise agreement. Results Thirty-five raters participated, including 9 neuroradiologists, 17 neurologists, 4 radiation oncologists, 3 neurosurgeons and 2 medical oncologists. Among single leptomeningeal metastases-related imaging findings at baseline, the best median concordance was noted for hydrocephalus (Kappa=0.63), and the worst median concordance for spinal linear enhancing disease (Kappa=0.46). The median concordance of raters for the overall response assessment was moderate (Kappa=0.44). Notably, the interobserver agreement for the presence of parenchymal brain metastases at baseline was fair (Kappa=0.29) and virtually absent for their response to treatment. 394 of 700 ratings (20 patients x 35 raters, 56%) were fully completed. In 308 of 394 fully completed ratings (78%), the overall response assessment perfectly matched the summary interpretation of the single ratings as proposed in the scorecard instructions. Conclusion This study confirms the principle utility of the new scorecard, but also indicates the need for training of MRI assessment with a dedicated reviewer panel in clinical trials. Electronic case report forms with “blocking options” may be required to enforce completeness and quality of scoring.
Background In end-stage renal transplant recipients with autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), the imperative, optimal timing, and technique of native nephrectomy remains under discussion. The Freiburg Transplant Center routinely performs a simultaneous ipsilateral nephrectomy. Methods From April 1998 to May 2017, we retrospectively analyzed 193 consecutive ADPKD recipients, receiving per protocol simultaneous ipsilateral nephrectomy and compared morbidity, mortality, and outcome with 193 non-ADPKD recipients of a matched pair control. Results The incidence of surgical complications was similar with respect to severe medical, surgical, urological, vascular, and wound-related complications as well as reoperation rates and 30-day mortality. Intraoperative blood transfusions were required more often in the ADPKD (22.8%) compared with the control group (6.7%; p < 0.0001). Early postoperative urinary tract infections occurred more frequent (ADPKD 40.4%/control 29.0%; p = 0.0246). Time of surgery was prolonged by 30 min (ADPKD 169 min; 95%CI 159.8-175.6 min/control 139 min; 95%CI 131.4-145.0 min; p < 0.0001). One-year patient (ADPKD 96.4%/control 95.8%; p = 0.6537) and death-censored graft survival (ADPKD 94.8%/control 93.7%; p = 0.5479) were comparable between both groups. Conclusions With respect to morbidity and mortality, per protocol, simultaneous native nephrectomy is a safe procedure. Especially in asymptomatic ADPKD KTx recipients, the number of total operations can be reduced and residual diuresis preserved up until transplantation. In living donation, even preemptive transplantation is possible.
BACKGROUND Validation of the 2016 LANO MRI scorecard for leptomeningeal metastasis failed for multiple reasons. The objective of this joint EORTC Brain Tumor Group and RANO effort was to validate the feasibility of the revised MRI scorecard for assessing response in leptomeningeal metastasis. METHODS Coded paired cerebrospinal MRI of 20 patients with leptomeningeal metastases from solid cancers at baseline and follow-up after treatment and instructions for assessment were provided via the EORTC imaging platform. The kappa coefficient (K) was used to evaluate inter-observer pairwise agreement. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS V9.4 software (Cary, NC). The sponsor of the study was the University Hospital Zurich (2018-00192). RESULTS Thirty-five raters participated, including 9 neuroradiologists, 17 neurologists, 4 radiation oncologists, 3 neurosurgeons and 2 medical oncologists. Among leptomeningeal metastases-related items at baseline, the best median concordance was noted for hydrocephalus (K=0.63), and the worst median for spinal linear enhancing disease (K=0.46). The median concordance for overall response was moderate (K=0.44). Notably, the interobserver agreement for the presence of parenchymal brain metastases at baseline was minimal (K=0.29). Significant differences were observed when considering the specialty of the raters. Only 394 of 700 ratings (56%) were fully completed. Among 394 fully completed ratings, perfect concordance was noted in 293 ratings (74%) when comparing the overall response according to the guidelines provided in the scorecard and the overall response provided by the raters. The main discordances were noted for partial response according to the rater versus stable disease according to the guidelines (n=44), followed by progression according to the raters versus stable disease according to the guidelines (n=23). CONCLUSION Electronic case report forms with "blocking solutions" are probably required to enforce completeness and quality of scoring. These results confirm the necessity of central review and the need for training of MRI assessment in clinical trials.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.