ArticleThe British journal of radiology2018
Influence of lung nodule margin on volume- and diameter-based reader variability in CT lung cancer screening.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed.
- Insights for Management of Ground-Glass Opacities From the National Lung Screening Trial.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2019Trial
- A narrative review on CT-based evaluation and prediction of lung nodule growth: current status and future directions.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Review
- Article
- Assessing the impact of nodule features and software algorithm on pulmonary nodule measurement uncertainty for nodules sized 20 mm or less.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Detection, measurement, and diagnosis of lung nodules by ultra-low-dose CT in lung cancer screening: a systematic review.BJR open · 2024Article
- Factors influencing the outcome of volumetry tools for pulmonary nodule analysis: a systematic review and attempted meta-analysis.Insights into imaging · 2023Review
- Managing Persistent Subsolid Nodules in Lung Cancer: Education, Decision Making, and Impact of Interval Growth Patterns.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Detection and size quantification of pulmonary nodules in ultralow-dose versus regular-dose CT: a comparative study in COPD patients.The British journal of radiology · 2023Article
- Clinical Scores, Biomarkers and IT Tools in Lung Cancer Screening-Can an Integrated Approach Overcome Current Challenges?Cancers · 2023Review
- Research Progress of Respiratory Disease and Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Based on Artificial Intelligence.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Prediction of Lung Nodule Progression with an Uncertainty-Aware Hierarchical Probabilistic Network.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Clinical outcomes of hyperprogression based on volumetry in non-small cell lung cancer after immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment.Thoracic cancer · 2022Article
- Low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening: Clinical evidence and implementation research.Journal of internal medicine · 2022Review
- Diagnostic study on clinical feasibility of an AI-based diagnostic system as a second reader on mobile CT images: a preliminary result.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Determination of the optimum definition of growth evaluation for indeterminate pulmonary nodules detected in lung cancer screening.PloS one · 2022Article
- The Effect of Lung Volume on the Size and Volume of Pulmonary Subsolid Nodules on CT: Intraindividual Comparison between Total Lung Capacity and Tidal Volume.Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe chi · 2021Article
- Optimum diameter threshold for lung nodules at baseline lung cancer screening with low-dose chest CT: exploration of results from the Korean Lung Cancer Screening Project.European radiology · 2021Article
- Screen-detected solid nodules: from detection of nodule to structured reporting.Translational lung cancer research · 2021Review
- Lung cancer LDCT screening and mortality reduction - evidence, pitfalls and future perspectives.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2021Review
- Improved Interobserver Agreement on Lung-RADS Classification of Solid Nodules Using Semiautomated CT Volumetry.Radiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objective: To evaluate the influence of nodule margin on inter- and intrareader variability in manual diameter measurements and semi-automatic volume measurements of solid nodules detected in low-dose CT lung cancer screening.
methods: 25 nodules of each morphological category (smooth, lobulated, spiculated and irregular) were randomly selected from 93 participants of the Dutch-Belgian Randomized Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NELSON). Semi-automatic volume measurements were performed using Syngo LungCARE® software (Version Somaris/5 VB10A-W, Siemens, Forchheim, Germany). Three radiologists independently measured mean diameters manually. Impact of nodule margin on interreader variability was evaluated based on systematic error and 95% limits of agreement. Interreader variability was compared with the nodule growth cut-off as used in Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (LungRADS; +1.5-mm diameter) and the Dutch-Belgian Randomized Lung Cancer Screening Trial(acronym: NELSON) /British Thoracic Society (+25% volume).
results: For manual diameter measurements, a significant systematic error (up to 1.2 mm) between readers was found in all morphological categories. For semi-automatic volume measurements, no statistically significant systematic error was found. The interreader variability in mean diameter measurements exceeded the 1.5-mm cut-off for nodule growth for all morphological categories [smooth: ±1.9 mm (+27%), lobulated: ±2.0 mm (+33%), spiculated: ±3.5 mm (+133%), irregular: ±4.5 mm (+200%)]. The 25% vol growth cut-off was exceeded slightly for spiculated [28% (+12%)] and irregular [27% (+8%)] nodules.
conclusion: Lung nodule sizing based on manual diameter measurement is affected by nodule margin. Interreader variability increases especially for nodules with spiculated and irregular margins, and causes substantial misclassification of nodule growth. This effect is almost neglectable for semi-automated volume measurements. Semi-automatic volume measurements are superior for both size and growth determination of pulmonary nodules. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:: Nodule assessment based on manual diameter measurements is susceptible to nodule margin. This effect is almost neglectable for semi-automated volume measurements. The larger interreader variability for manual diameter measurement results in inaccurate lung nodule growth detection and size classification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.