ArticleReports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology2026
Interobserver variability in dominant intraprostatic lesion delineation using
Article in Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We evaluated interobserver variability in delineating the dominant intraprostatic lesion (DIL) using Gallium-68 labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand ( Materials and methods: Twenty patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer who underwent definitive radiotherapy were retrospectively analyzed. Three nuclear medicine specialists and one radiation oncologist independently delineated DIL volumes. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to assess interobserver agreement. The effects of clinical and tumor characteristics, including prostate volume, DIL size, maximum standardized uptake value (SUV Results: The interobserver agreement among all four experts was almost perfect [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68-0.92]. The nuclear medicine specialist with access to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) data delineated significantly smaller DIL volumes compared to nuclear medicine specialists without mpMRI access (p < 0.001). The radiation oncologist also delineated smaller and more conservative DIL volumes than all nuclear medicine specialists (p = 0.002). Agreement decreased (ICC < 0.8) in patients with a prostate volume > 40 cc, DIL length > 15 mm, SUV Conclusions: Although interobserver agreement in DIL delineation was almost perfect, specific patient- and tumor-related factors were associated with increased variability. Particular caution is warranted when outlining DILs in patients with larger prostate volumes, greater lesion lengths, higher SUV
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.