ArticleOral oncology2025
Evaluating observer reliability and diagnostic accuracy of CT-LEFAT criteria for post-treatment head and neck lymphedema: A prospective blinded comparative analysis.
Article in Oral oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRadiation-associated lymphedema and fibrosis (LEF) is a significant toxicity following radiation therapy (RT) for head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. Recently, the CT Lymphedema and Fibrosis Assessment Tool (CT-LEFAT) was developed to standardize LEF diagnosis through fat stranding visualized on CT. This study aims to evaluate the inter-observer reliability and diagnostic accuracy of the CT-LEFAT criteria. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study retrospectively evaluated 26 HNC patients treated with RT that received a minimum of two contrast-enhanced CT scans. Qualitative review was conducted by five physician raters to assess the fat stranding observed on CT according to the CT-LEFAT criteria. Fleiss' kappa analysis was used to assess the inter- and intra-rater reliability, and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Area Under the Curve (AUC) analysis was used to evaluate diagnostic accuracy.
resultsThe inter-rater reliability across the six CT-LEFAT regions generally indicated a slight to fair agreement across all raters (0.04 ≤ kappa ≤ 0.36). Intra-observer agreement was generally fair to moderate (overall kappa = 0.44). The ROC AUC analysis varied based on aggregation method used (0.60 ≤ average AUC ≤ 0.70).
conclusionThis specific use-case evaluating CT-LEFAT criteria displays limited performance. This suggests that additional materials, such as further training, refinement of imaging methods, or other processes may be required before achieving clinically-ready diagnostic performance of LEF diagnosis.
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.