These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Interreader and inter-test agreement in assessing treatment response following transarterial embolization for hepatocellular carcinoma.
    Author: Donati OF, Do RK, Hötker AM, Katz SS, Zheng J, Moskowitz CS, Beattie C, Brown KT.
    Journal: Eur Radiol; 2015 Sep; 25(9):2779-88. PubMed ID: 25850892.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To evaluate interreader and inter-test agreement in applying size- and necrosis-based response assessment criteria after transarterial embolization (TAE) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), applying two different methods of European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) criteria. METHODS: Seventy-four patients (median age, 67 years) from a prospectively accrued study population were included in this retrospective study. Four radiologists independently evaluated CT data at 2-3 (1st follow-up, FU) and 10-12 (2nd FU) weeks after TAE and assessed treatment response using size-based (WHO, RECIST) and necrosis-based (mRECIST, EASL) criteria. Enhancing tissue was bidimensionally measured (EASLmeas) and also visually estimated (EASLest). Interreader and inter-test agreements were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and κ statistics. RESULTS: Interreader agreement for all response assessment methods ranged from moderate to substantial (κ = 0.578-0.700) at 1st FU and was substantial (κ = 0.716-0.780) at 2nd FU. Inter-test agreement was substantial between WHO and RECIST (κ = 0.610-0.799, 1st FU; κ = 0.655-0.782, 2nd FU) and excellent between EASLmeas and EASLest (κ = 0.899-0.918, 1st FU; κ = 0.843-0.877, 2nd FU). CONCLUSION: Size- and necrosis-based criteria both show moderate to excellent interreader agreement in evaluating treatment response after TAE for HCC. Inter-test agreement regarding EASLmeas and EASLest was excellent, suggesting that either may be used. KEY POINTS: • Applying EASL criteria, visual estimation and bidimensional measurements show comparable interreader agreement. • EASL meas and EASL est show substantial interreader agreement for treatment response in HCC. • Agreement was excellent for EASL meas and EASL est after TAE of HCC. • Visual estimation of enhancement is adequate to assess treatment response of HCC.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]