Do Diametric Measurements Provide Sufficient and Reliable Tumor Assessment? An Evaluation of Diametric, Areametric, and Volumetric Variability of Lung Lesion Measurements on Computerized Tomography Scans

Abstract

Diametric analysis is the standard approach utilized for tumor measurement on medical imaging. However, the availability of newer more sophisticated techniques may prove advantageous. An evaluation of diameter, area, and volume was performed on 64 different lung lesions by three trained users. These calculations were obtained using a free DICOM viewer and standardized measuring procedures. Measurement variability was then studied using relative standard deviation (RSD) and intraclass correlation. Volumetric measurements were shown to be more precise than diametric. With minimal RSD and variance between different users, volumetric analysis was demonstrated as a reliable measurement technique. Additionally, the diameters were used to calculate an estimated area and volume; thereafter the estimated area and volume were compared against the actual measured values. The results in this study showed independence of the estimated and actual values. Estimated area deviated an average of 43.5% from the actual measured, and volume deviated 88.03%. The range of this variance was widely scattered and without trend. These results suggest that diametric measurements cannot be reliably correlated to actual tumor size. Access to appropriate software capable of producing volume measurements has improved drastically and shows great potential in the clinical assessment of tumors. Its applicability merits further consideration.

Machine Learning Analysis of Individual Tumor Lesions in Four Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Clinical Studies: Linking Tumor Heterogeneity to Overall Survival

“…This may point to a better characterization of tumor heterogeneity when bidimensional data are collected for this case study. Indeed, literature shows that such differences between TS metrics depend on the kind of cancer: in some cases, there are no differences between unidimensional or bidimensional measurements (33), while in other cases, there are significant differences between results obtained with these two metrics (34,35).…”

Skeletal Muscle Metrics on Clinical 18F- FDG PET/CT Predict Health Outcomes in Patients with Sarcoma

“…We believe that volumetric measures will be more reproducible and robust compared to crosssectional area measures (in our case, from the L3 and L4 cross-sections), analogous to findings regarding tumor volumetric measurements. [19] Our results show that imaging measures from a single axial section may not be representative of measures derived using volumetric analyses. Overall, more volumetric measures were associated with health outcomes compared with cross-sectional measures.…”

Pulmonary nodules volumetry. Variability in Results After Manual Correction of Contours

“…Объём изученных очагов (n = 27) находился в диапазоне от 19 до 16 493 мм 3 . Нами не было найдено взаимосвязи между показателями размера очага (объёмом и эффективным диаметром) и относительной площадью соприкосновения очага c неочаговыми структурами (r = 0,2128731, p = 0,0563898) (рис.…”

“…Так как форма образований в лёгких часто отличается от шара, судить о нём по диаметру было бы неточно [3]. Стандартное отклонение такой оценки составляет 88% и не зависит от размеров образования.…”

“…Было продемонстрировано, что вариабельность автоматической волюметрии очагов с возможностью ручной коррекции контуров выше по сравнению с ручным измерением наибольшего диаметра. При измерении наибольшего размера 95% доверительный интервал повторных измерений одним специалистом составляет от -16 до 26%, а при полуавтоматической волюметрииот -23 до 34% [3].…”