Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2/2009

01-02-2009 | Original Article

Observer variation in FDG PET-CT for staging of non-small-cell lung carcinoma

Authors: Michael S. Hofman, Nigel C. Smeeton, Sheila C. Rankin, Tom Nunan, Michael J. O’Doherty

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Issue 2/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Error and variation in reporting remains one of the weakest features of clinical imaging despite enormous technological advances in nuclear medicine and radiology. The aim of this study was to evaluate agreement amongst experienced readers in staging non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with PET-CT.

Methods

A series of 18F-FDG PET-CT scans from 100 consecutive patients were reviewed independently by three experienced readers, with two readers reviewing each scan series a second time. Individual mediastinal lymph node stations were assessed as benign/inflammatory, equivocal or malignant, and AJCC N and M stage were also assigned. Kappa (κ) was used to compare ratings from two categories and weighted kappa (κw) for three or more categories, and kappa values were interpreted according to the Landis-Koch benchmarks.

Results

Both intra- and interobserver agreement for N and M staging were high. For M staging there was almost perfect intra- and interobserver agreement (κ = 0.90–0.93). For N staging, agreement was either almost perfect or substantial (intraobserver κw = 0.79, 0.91; interobserver κw = 0.75–0.81). Importantly, there was almost perfect agreement for N0/1 vs N2/3 disease (κ = 0.80–0.97). Agreement for inferior and superior mediastinal nodes (stations 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9) was either almost perfect or substantial (κw = 0.71–0.88), but lower for hilar nodes (10; κw = 0.56–0.71). Interreporter variability was greatest for aortopulmonary nodes (5, 6; κw = 0.48–0.55).

Conclusion

Amongst experienced reporters in a single centre, there was a very high level of agreement for both mediastinal nodal stage and detection of distant metastases with PET-CT. This supports the use of PET-CT as a robust imaging modality for staging NSCLC.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Robinson PJ. Radiology’s Achilles’ heel: error and variation in the interpretation of the Röntgen image. Br J Radiol 1997;70:1085–98.PubMed Robinson PJ. Radiology’s Achilles’ heel: error and variation in the interpretation of the Röntgen image. Br J Radiol 1997;70:1085–98.PubMed
2.
go back to reference Shim SS, Lee KS, Kim BT, Chung MJ, Lee EJ, Han J, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: prospective comparison of integrated FDG PET/CT and CT alone for preoperative staging. Radiology 2005;236:1011–9.PubMedCrossRef Shim SS, Lee KS, Kim BT, Chung MJ, Lee EJ, Han J, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: prospective comparison of integrated FDG PET/CT and CT alone for preoperative staging. Radiology 2005;236:1011–9.PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, Kamel EM, Korom S, Seifert B, et al. Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med 2003;348:2500–7.PubMedCrossRef Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, Kamel EM, Korom S, Seifert B, et al. Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med 2003;348:2500–7.PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF, van den Bergh JH, Schreurs AJ, Stallaert RA, et al. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography in the preoperative assessment of patients with suspected non-small-cell lung cancer: the PLUS multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 2002;359:1388–93.PubMedCrossRef van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF, van den Bergh JH, Schreurs AJ, Stallaert RA, et al. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography in the preoperative assessment of patients with suspected non-small-cell lung cancer: the PLUS multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 2002;359:1388–93.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Mountain CF, Dresler CM. Regional lymph node classification for lung cancer staging. Chest 1997;111:1718–23.PubMedCrossRef Mountain CF, Dresler CM. Regional lymph node classification for lung cancer staging. Chest 1997;111:1718–23.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Greene FL; American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC cancer staging manual. 6th ed. American Cancer Society. New York: Springer; 2002. xiv; p. 421. Greene FL; American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC cancer staging manual. 6th ed. American Cancer Society. New York: Springer; 2002. xiv; p. 421.
7.
go back to reference Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 1960;20:37–46.CrossRef Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 1960;20:37–46.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Cohen J. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychol Bull 1968;70:213–20.CrossRef Cohen J. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychol Bull 1968;70:213–20.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159–74.PubMedCrossRef Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159–74.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Efron B, Tibshirani R. An introduction to the bootstrap. Monographs on statistics and applied probability; 57. New York: Chapman & Hall; 1993. p. 436. xvi. Efron B, Tibshirani R. An introduction to the bootstrap. Monographs on statistics and applied probability; 57. New York: Chapman & Hall; 1993. p. 436. xvi.
11.
go back to reference Stata Corporation. Stata statistical software: release 9.2. College Station: Stata Corporation; 2007. Stata Corporation. Stata statistical software: release 9.2. College Station: Stata Corporation; 2007.
12.
go back to reference Smulders SA, Gundy CM, van Lingen A, Comans EF, Smeenk FW, Hoekstra OS. Observer variation of 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography in mediastinal staging of non-small cell lung cancer as a function of experience, and its potential clinical impact. Mol Imaging Biol 2007;9:318–22.PubMedCrossRef Smulders SA, Gundy CM, van Lingen A, Comans EF, Smeenk FW, Hoekstra OS. Observer variation of 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography in mediastinal staging of non-small cell lung cancer as a function of experience, and its potential clinical impact. Mol Imaging Biol 2007;9:318–22.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Marom EM, Munden RF, Truong MT, Gladish GW, Podoloff DA, Mawlawi O, et al. Interobserver and intraobserver variability of standardized uptake value measurements in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Thorac Imaging 2006;21:205–12.PubMedCrossRef Marom EM, Munden RF, Truong MT, Gladish GW, Podoloff DA, Mawlawi O, et al. Interobserver and intraobserver variability of standardized uptake value measurements in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Thorac Imaging 2006;21:205–12.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Lefcoe M, Walter S, Cook D, Troyan S, Griffith L, et al. Interobserver variation in the computed tomographic evaluation of mediastinal lymph node size in patients with potentially resectable lung cancer. Canadian Lung Oncology Group. Chest 1995;107:116–9.PubMedCrossRef Guyatt GH, Lefcoe M, Walter S, Cook D, Troyan S, Griffith L, et al. Interobserver variation in the computed tomographic evaluation of mediastinal lymph node size in patients with potentially resectable lung cancer. Canadian Lung Oncology Group. Chest 1995;107:116–9.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Cascade PN, Gross BH, Kazerooni EA, Quint LE, Francis IR, Strawderman M, et al. Variability in the detection of enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes in staging lung cancer: a comparison of contrast-enhanced and unenhanced CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;170:927–31.PubMed Cascade PN, Gross BH, Kazerooni EA, Quint LE, Francis IR, Strawderman M, et al. Variability in the detection of enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes in staging lung cancer: a comparison of contrast-enhanced and unenhanced CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;170:927–31.PubMed
16.
go back to reference Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Bonardi R, Catarzi S, Risso G, Rosseli Del Turco M, et al. Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme. J Med Screen 2005;12:103–6.PubMedCrossRef Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Bonardi R, Catarzi S, Risso G, Rosseli Del Turco M, et al. Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme. J Med Screen 2005;12:103–6.PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Okada M, Tsubota N, Yoshimura M, Miyamoto Y, Matsuoka H. Prognosis of completely resected pN2 non-small cell lung carcinomas: what is the significant node that affects survival? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;118:270–5.PubMedCrossRef Okada M, Tsubota N, Yoshimura M, Miyamoto Y, Matsuoka H. Prognosis of completely resected pN2 non-small cell lung carcinomas: what is the significant node that affects survival? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;118:270–5.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Observer variation in FDG PET-CT for staging of non-small-cell lung carcinoma
Authors
Michael S. Hofman
Nigel C. Smeeton
Sheila C. Rankin
Tom Nunan
Michael J. O’Doherty
Publication date
01-02-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue 2/2009
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-008-0946-3

Other articles of this Issue 2/2009

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2/2009 Go to the issue