Tumour ADC measurements in hepatic cancer:effect of different ROI methods on ADC values and interobserver variability

Qi PAN,Wei-huan HOU,Na LI,Zhen-hua ZHANG,Jun-tao LU,Wei-wei ZHAO,Hui-jia LIU,Jing REN,Yi HUAN
2015-01-01
Journal of Medical Imaging
Abstract:Objective To assess the influence of region of interest (ROI) size and positioning on tumour ADC measure‐ments and interobserver variability in patients with liver tumors before and after Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) .Methods Thirty‐six cases confirmed by pathology terminal‐stage liver cancer patients were included .Patients underwent MRI including DWI ( b = 0 ,600 ,1000) before and one months after TACE .Two readers measured mean tumour ADCs (pre‐ and post‐TACE) according to three ROI protocols :whole‐volume ,single‐slice or small solid samples . The three protocols were compared for differences in ADC ,SD and interobserver variability (measured as the intraclass correlation coefficient ;ICC) .Results Three methods of ROI set there were good consistency between different observers ( P > 0.05 ,ICC = 0 .99) .ICC for the whole‐volume ROIs was excellent (0 .91) pre‐CRT versus good (0 .79) post‐CRT . ICCs were 0 .77 and 0 .63 for the single‐slice ROIs versus 0 .76 and 0 .37 for the sample ROIs .Pre‐CRT ADCs for the sample ROIs were significantly lower than for the whole‐volume or single‐slice ROIs .Post‐CRT there were no significant differences between the whole‐volume ROIs and the single‐slice or sample ROIs ,respectively .The SDs for the whole‐vol‐ume and single‐slice ROIs were significantly larger than for the sample ROIs .Conclusion ROI size and positioning have a considerable influence on tumour ADC values and interobserver variability .Interobserver variability is worse after TACE . ADCs obtained from the whole tumour volume provide the most reproducible results .
What problem does this paper attempt to address?