Scholarlink

Objectives <p>Prostate cancer (PCa) lesions can be measured on MRI using maximum or biaxial diameters, or as volumes derived by the ellipsoid formula or planimetry. We evaluated the inter- and intra-rater reliability (reliability between different radiologists and the same radiologist during different reading sessions) of lesion size measurements on baseline MRI scans for patients on active surveillance (AS).</p> Materials and methods <p>Twenty patients with low- or intermediate-risk PCa (Gleason score 3 + 3 or 3 + 4) and MRI-visible lesions were selected from AS cohorts at two centres (United Kingdom and Italy). Five radiologists, blinded to clinical outcomes and reports, independently measured the index lesion on a&#xa0;baseline MRI scan&#xa0;in a single reading&#xa0;session using: (1) maximum diameter; (2) biaxial diameters; (3) ellipsoid volume, and (4) planimetry volume. Measurements were repeated after a 4-week washout period. Strip plots present lesion size measurements for all methods and readers. Bland–Altman plots were used to present intra-rater reliability.</p> Results <p>Graphical presentation of measurements across the twenty patients enabled examination of variability between methods, readers, and reads. There was considerable variation for all methods, and for a single lesion, size measurements spanned previously accepted definitions of clinically significant and insignificant disease. Inter-rater reliability decreased for larger lesions, with notable radiologist-specific differences, and intra-rater reliability appeared better overall.</p> Conclusion <p>This study underscores the difficulty of reliably measuring PCa lesions during AS. Intra-rater reliability appeared greater than inter-rater reliability, emphasising that radiologists should remeasure lesions when tracking changes. More work is needed on measuring change in lesion size across serial MRI scans.</p> Key Points <p><Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Question</Emphasis><i> Several methods exist for measuring prostate cancer lesion size on MRI for patients on active surveillance, but it is unclear how reliable these methods are</i>.</p> <p><Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Findings</Emphasis><i> Lesion size measurements varied widely across methods and readers, often spanning thresholds for clinically significant disease, and intra-rater reliability was generally better than inter-rater reliability</i>.</p> <p><Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Clinical relevance</Emphasis><i> Variability in lesion size measurements on MRI may lead to inconsistent clinical decisions during active surveillance. Our findings emphasise that regardless of the method used, lesions should be remeasured by the same radiologist when monitoring patients on active surveillance</i>.</p> Graphical Abstract <p></p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Inter- and intra-rater variability of MRI-based lesion size measurements in active surveillance for prostate cancer: a multicentre study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月6日

查看全文
  • Cameron Englman,
  • Busola Adebusoye,
  • Michele Cosenza,
  • Andrea Del Prete,
  • Louise Dickinson,
  • Giulio Imperiale,
  • Riccardo Leni,
  • Giorgio Gandaglia,
  • Francesco De Cobelli,
  • Sue Mallett,
  • Alex Kirkham,
  • Caroline M. Moore,
  • Francesco Giganti,
  • Giorgio Brembilla

摘要

Objectives

Prostate cancer (PCa) lesions can be measured on MRI using maximum or biaxial diameters, or as volumes derived by the ellipsoid formula or planimetry. We evaluated the inter- and intra-rater reliability (reliability between different radiologists and the same radiologist during different reading sessions) of lesion size measurements on baseline MRI scans for patients on active surveillance (AS).

Materials and methods

Twenty patients with low- or intermediate-risk PCa (Gleason score 3 + 3 or 3 + 4) and MRI-visible lesions were selected from AS cohorts at two centres (United Kingdom and Italy). Five radiologists, blinded to clinical outcomes and reports, independently measured the index lesion on a baseline MRI scan in a single reading session using: (1) maximum diameter; (2) biaxial diameters; (3) ellipsoid volume, and (4) planimetry volume. Measurements were repeated after a 4-week washout period. Strip plots present lesion size measurements for all methods and readers. Bland–Altman plots were used to present intra-rater reliability.

Results

Graphical presentation of measurements across the twenty patients enabled examination of variability between methods, readers, and reads. There was considerable variation for all methods, and for a single lesion, size measurements spanned previously accepted definitions of clinically significant and insignificant disease. Inter-rater reliability decreased for larger lesions, with notable radiologist-specific differences, and intra-rater reliability appeared better overall.

Conclusion

This study underscores the difficulty of reliably measuring PCa lesions during AS. Intra-rater reliability appeared greater than inter-rater reliability, emphasising that radiologists should remeasure lesions when tracking changes. More work is needed on measuring change in lesion size across serial MRI scans.

Key Points

Question Several methods exist for measuring prostate cancer lesion size on MRI for patients on active surveillance, but it is unclear how reliable these methods are.

Findings Lesion size measurements varied widely across methods and readers, often spanning thresholds for clinically significant disease, and intra-rater reliability was generally better than inter-rater reliability.

Clinical relevance Variability in lesion size measurements on MRI may lead to inconsistent clinical decisions during active surveillance. Our findings emphasise that regardless of the method used, lesions should be remeasured by the same radiologist when monitoring patients on active surveillance.

Graphical Abstract