Observer variability in RECIST-based tumour burden measurements: a meta-analysis

被引:68
作者
Yoon, Soon Ho [1 ,2 ]
Kim, Kyung Won [3 ]
Goo, Jin Mo [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Kim, Dong-Wan [5 ]
Hahn, Seokyung [6 ]
机构
[1] Seoul Natl Univ, Coll Med, Dept Radiol, Seoul, South Korea
[2] Seoul Natl Univ, Med Res Ctr, Inst Radiat Med, Seoul, South Korea
[3] Univ Ulsan, Coll Med, Asan Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Seoul, South Korea
[4] Seoul Natl Univ, Canc Res Inst, Seoul 151, South Korea
[5] Seoul Natl Univ, Coll Med, Dept Internal Med, Seoul 151, South Korea
[6] Seoul Natl Univ, Coll Med, Dept Med, 101 Daehang No, Seoul 110744, South Korea
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会;
关键词
Tumour burden; Measurement; Observer variation; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours; Meta-analysis; RESPONSE EVALUATION CRITERIA; SOLID TUMORS; INTRAOBSERVER VARIABILITY; TARGET LESIONS; INTEROBSERVER VARIABILITY; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; VOLUMETRIC-ANALYSIS; LIVER METASTASES; CLINICAL-TRIALS; MINIMUM NUMBER;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejca.2015.10.014
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST)-based tumour burden measurements involve observer variability, the extent of which ought to be determined. Methods: A literature search identified studies on observer variability during manual measurements of tumour burdens via computed tomography according to the RECIST guideline. The 95% limit of agreement (LOA) values of relative measurement difference (RMD) were pooled using a random-effects model. Results: Twelve studies were included. Pooled 95% LOAs of RMD in measuring unidimensional longest diameters of single lesions ranged from -22.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], -30.3% to -14.0%) to 25.4% (95% CI, 17.2% to 33.5%) between observers and -17.8% (95% CI, -23.6% to -11.9%) to 16.1% (95% CI, 10.1% to 21.8%) for a single observer. Pooled 95% LOAs of RMD in measuring the sum of multiple lesions ranged from -19.2% (95% CI, -23.7% to -14.9%) to 19.5% (95% CI, 15.2% to 23.9%) between observers, and -9.8% (95% CI, -19.0% to -0.3%) to 13.1% (95% CI, 3.6% to 22.6%) for a single observer. Pooled 95% LOA of RMD in calculating the interval change of tumour burden with a single lesion ranged from -31.3% (95% CI, -46.0% to -16.5%) to 30.3% (95% CI, 15.3% to 44.8%) between observers. Studies on calculating the interval change of tumour burden for a single observer or with multiple lesions were lacking. Conclusion: Interobserver RMD in measuring single tumour burden and calculating its interval change may exceed the 20% cut-off for progression. Variability decreased when tumour burden was measured by a single observer or assessed by the sum of multiple lesions. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:5 / 15
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Burden of pelvic organ prolapse in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Gedefaw, Getnet
    Demis, Asmamaw
    [J]. BMC WOMENS HEALTH, 2020, 20 (01)
  • [32] Burden of Heart Failure in Latin America: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Ciapponi, Agustin
    Alcaraz, Andrea
    Calderon, Maria
    Gabriela Matta, Maria
    Chaparro, Martin
    Soto, Natalie
    Bardach, Ariel
    [J]. REVISTA ESPANOLA DE CARDIOLOGIA, 2016, 69 (11): : 1051 - 1060
  • [33] Burden of neural tube defects in India: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Sinha, Anuvi
    Ponmani, P.
    Chakraborty, Hirok
    Barnwal, Rajan Kumar
    Sinha, Ratnesh
    [J]. CHILDS NERVOUS SYSTEM, 2024, 40 (12) : 4123 - 4135
  • [34] Response Burden and Questionnaire Length: Is Shorter Better? A Review and Meta-analysis
    Rolstad, Sindre
    Adler, John
    Ryden, Anna
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2011, 14 (08) : 1101 - 1108
  • [35] Burden of diabetes in correctional facilities: A global systematic review and meta-analysis
    Shabil, Muhammed
    Gaidhane, Shilpa
    Lakhanpal, Sorabh
    Irshaidat, Sara
    Ballal, Suhas
    Kumar, Sanjay
    Bhat, Mahakshit
    Sharma, Shilpa
    Kumar, M. Ravi
    Rustagi, Sarvesh
    Khatib, Mahalaqua Nazli
    Mishra, Sunil Kumar
    Sah, Sanjit
    Abu Serhan, Hashem
    Bushi, Ganesh
    Padhi, Bijaya K.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2025, 39
  • [36] From debt to despair: a meta-analysis of debt burden and suicidal behaviours
    Ali, Syahrul Anuar
    Zabri, Mohd Zaidi Md
    Dasar, Mohd Hafiz Mohd
    Nordin, Muhammad Farhan
    [J]. MENTAL HEALTH AND SOCIAL INCLUSION, 2025,
  • [37] The burden of neuropathic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of health utilities
    Doth, Alissa H.
    Hansson, Per T.
    Jensen, Mark P.
    Taylor, Rod S.
    [J]. PAIN, 2010, 149 (02) : 338 - 344
  • [38] Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane burden and breast cancer risk:: A meta-analysis of the epidemiologic evidence
    López-Cervantes, M
    Torres-Sánchez, L
    Tobías, A
    López-Carrillo, L
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES, 2004, 112 (02) : 207 - 214
  • [39] Burden of pelvic organ prolapse in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Getnet Gedefaw
    Asmamaw Demis
    [J]. BMC Women's Health, 20
  • [40] Hypertension in Zimbabwe: A meta-analysis to quantify its burden and policy implications
    Mutowo, Mutsa Pamela
    Mangwiro, John Chamunorwa
    Lorgelly, Paula
    Owen, Alice
    Renzaho, Andre M. N.
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF META-ANALYSIS, 2015, 3 (01): : 54 - 60