The British journal of radiology · 2016
Comparing the sensitivity of linear and volumetric MRI measurements to detect changes in the size of vestibular schwannomas in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2 on bevacizumab treatment.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Morris Katrina A, Parry Allyson, Pretorius Pieter M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivity of linear and volumetric measurements on MRI in detecting schwannoma progression in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2 on bevacizumab treatment as well as the extent to which this depends on the size of the tumour.
METHODS: We compared retrospectively, changes in linear tumour dimensions at a range of thresholds to volumetric tumour measurements performed using Brainlab iPlan(®) software (Feldkirchen, Germany) and classified for tumour progression according to the Response Evaluation in Neurofibromatosis and Schwannomatosis (REiNS) criteria.
RESULTS: Assessment of 61 schwannomas in 46 patients with a median follow-up of 20 months (range 3-43 months) was performed. There was a mean of 7 time points per tumour (range 2-12 time points). Using the volumetric REiNS criteria as the gold standard, a sensitivity of 86% was achieved for linear measurement using a 2-mm threshold to define progression.
CONCLUSION: We propose that a change in linear measurement by 2 mm (particularly in tumours with starting diameters 20-30 mm, the majority of this cohort) could be used as a filter to identify cases of possible progression requiring volumetric analysis. This pragmatic approach can be used if stabilization of a previously growing schwannoma is sufficient for a patient to continue treatment in such a circumstance.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: We demonstrate the real-world limitations of linear vs volumetric measurement in tumour response assessment and identify limited circumstances where linear measurements can be used to determine which patients require the more resource-intensive volumetric measurements.
METHODS: We compared retrospectively, changes in linear tumour dimensions at a range of thresholds to volumetric tumour measurements performed using Brainlab iPlan(®) software (Feldkirchen, Germany) and classified for tumour progression according to the Response Evaluation in Neurofibromatosis and Schwannomatosis (REiNS) criteria.
RESULTS: Assessment of 61 schwannomas in 46 patients with a median follow-up of 20 months (range 3-43 months) was performed. There was a mean of 7 time points per tumour (range 2-12 time points). Using the volumetric REiNS criteria as the gold standard, a sensitivity of 86% was achieved for linear measurement using a 2-mm threshold to define progression.
CONCLUSION: We propose that a change in linear measurement by 2 mm (particularly in tumours with starting diameters 20-30 mm, the majority of this cohort) could be used as a filter to identify cases of possible progression requiring volumetric analysis. This pragmatic approach can be used if stabilization of a previously growing schwannoma is sufficient for a patient to continue treatment in such a circumstance.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: We demonstrate the real-world limitations of linear vs volumetric measurement in tumour response assessment and identify limited circumstances where linear measurements can be used to determine which patients require the more resource-intensive volumetric measurements.