Volumetry of low-contrast liver lesions with CT: Investigation of estimation uncertainties in a phantom study

Purpose: To evaluate the performance of lesion volumetry in hepatic CT as a function of various imaging acquisition parameters. Methods: An anthropomorphic abdominal phantom with removable liver inserts was designed for this study. Two liver inserts, each containing 19 synthetic lesions with varying diameter (6–40 mm), shape, contrast (10–65 HU), and both homogenous and mixed-density were designed to have background and lesion CT values corresponding to arterial and portal-venous phase imaging, respectively. The two phantoms were scanned using two commercial CT scanners (GE 750 HD and Siemens Biograph mCT) across a set of imaging protocols (four slice thicknesses, three effective mAs, two convolution kernels, two pitches). Two repeated scans were collected for each imaging protocol. All scans were analyzed using a matched-filter estimator for volume estimation, resulting in 6080 volume measurements across all of the synthetic lesions in the two liver phantoms. A subset of portal venous phase scans was also analyzed using a semi-automatic segmentation algorithm, resulting in about 900 additional volume measurements. Lesions associated with large measurement error (quantified by root mean square error) for most imaging protocols were considered not measurable by the volume estimation tools and excluded for the statistical analyses. Imaging protocols were grouped into distinct imaging conditions based on ANOVA analysis of factors for repeatability testing. Statistical analyses, including overall linearity analysis, grouped bias analysis with standard deviation evaluation, and repeatability analysis, were performed to assess the accuracy and precision of the liver lesion volume biomarker. Results: Lesions with lower contrast and size ≤10 mm were associated with higher measurement error and were excluded from further analysis. Lesion size, contrast, imaging slice thickness, dose, and scanner were found to be factors substantially influencing volume estimation. Twenty-four distinct repeatable imaging conditions were determined as protocols for each scanner with a fixed slice thickness and dose. For the matched-filter estimation approach, strong linearity was observed for all imaging data for lesions ≥20 mm. For the Siemens scanner with 50 mAs effective dose at 0.6 mm slice thickness, grouped bias was about −10%. For all other repeatable imaging conditions with both scanners, grouped biases were low (−3%–3%). There was a trend of increasing standard deviation with decreasing dose. For each fixed dose, the standard deviations were similar among the three larger slice thicknesses (1.25, 2.5, 5 mm for GE, 1.5, 3, 5 mm for Siemens). Repeatability coefficients ranged from about 8% to 75% and showed similar trend to grouped standard deviation. For the segmentation approach, the results led to similar conclusions for both lesion characteristic factors and imaging factors but with increasing magnitude in all the error metrics assessed. Conclusions: Results showed that liver lesion volumetry was strongly dependent on lesion size, contrast, acquisition dose, and their interactions. The overall performances were similar for images reconstructed with larger slice thicknesses, clinically used pitches, kernels, and doses. Conditions that yielded repeatable measurements were identified and they agreed with the Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance’s (QIBA) profile requirements in general. The authors’ findings also suggest potential refinements to these guidelines for the tumor volume biomarker, especially for soft-tissue lesions

Volumetry of low-contrast liver lesions with CT: Investigation of estimation uncertainties in a phantom study

Purpose: To evaluate the performance of lesion volumetry in hepatic CT as a function of various imaging acquisition parameters. Methods: An anthropomorphic abdominal phantom with removable liver inserts was designed for this study. Two liver inserts, each containing 19 synthetic lesions with varying diameter (6–40 mm), shape, contrast (10–65 HU), and both homogenous and mixed-density were designed to have background and lesion CT values corresponding to arterial and portal-venous phase imaging, respectively. The two phantoms were scanned using two commercial CT scanners (GE 750 HD and Siemens Biograph mCT) across a set of imaging protocols (four slice thicknesses, three effective mAs, two convolution kernels, two pitches). Two repeated scans were collected for each imaging protocol. All scans were analyzed using a matched-filter estimator for volume estimation, resulting in 6080 volume measurements across all of the synthetic lesions in the two liver phantoms. A subset of portal venous phase scans was also analyzed using a semi-automatic segmentation algorithm, resulting in about 900 additional volume measurements. Lesions associated with large measurement error (quantified by root mean square error) for most imaging protocols were considered not measurable by the volume estimation tools and excluded for the statistical analyses. Imaging protocols were grouped into distinct imaging conditions based on ANOVA analysis of factors for repeatability testing. Statistical analyses, including overall linearity analysis, grouped bias analysis with standard deviation evaluation, and repeatability analysis, were performed to assess the accuracy and precision of the liver lesion volume biomarker. Results: Lesions with lower contrast and size ≤10 mm were associated with higher measurement error and were excluded from further analysis. Lesion size, contrast, imaging slice thickness, dose, and scanner were found to be factors substantially influencing volume estimation. Twenty-four distinct repeatable imaging conditions were determined as protocols for each scanner with a fixed slice thickness and dose. For the matched-filter estimation approach, strong linearity was observed for all imaging data for lesions ≥20 mm. For the Siemens scanner with 50 mAs effective dose at 0.6 mm slice thickness, grouped bias was about −10%. For all other repeatable imaging conditions with both scanners, grouped biases were low (−3%–3%). There was a trend of increasing standard deviation with decreasing dose. For each fixed dose, the standard deviations were similar among the three larger slice thicknesses (1.25, 2.5, 5 mm for GE, 1.5, 3, 5 mm for Siemens). Repeatability coefficients ranged from about 8% to 75% and showed similar trend to grouped standard deviation. For the segmentation approach, the results led to similar conclusions for both lesion characteristic factors and imaging factors but with increasing magnitude in all the error metrics assessed. Conclusions: Results showed that liver lesion volumetry was strongly dependent on lesion size, contrast, acquisition dose, and their interactions. The overall performances were similar for images reconstructed with larger slice thicknesses, clinically used pitches, kernels, and doses. Conditions that yielded repeatable measurements were identified and they agreed with the Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance’s (QIBA) profile requirements in general. The authors’ findings also suggest potential refinements to these guidelines for the tumor volume biomarker, especially for soft-tissue lesions

Pathologist Concordance for Ovarian Carcinoma Subtype Classification and Identification of Relevant Histologic Features Using Microscope and Whole Slide Imaging.

CONTEXT.—: Despite several studies focusing on the validation of whole slide imaging (WSI) across organ systems or subspecialties, the use of WSI for specific primary diagnosis tasks has been underexamined. OBJECTIVE.—: To assess pathologist performance for the histologic subtyping of individual sections of ovarian carcinomas using a light microscope and WSI. DESIGN.—: A panel of 3 experienced gynecologic pathologists provided reference subtype diagnoses for 212 histologic sections from 109 ovarian carcinomas based on optical microscopy review. Two additional attending pathologists provided diagnoses and also identified the presence of a set of 8 histologic features important for ovarian tumor subtyping. Two experienced gynecologic pathologists and 2 fellows reviewed the corresponding WSI images for subtype classification and feature identification. RESULTS.—: Across pathologists specialized in gynecologic pathology, concordance with the reference diagnosis for the 5 major ovarian carcinoma subtypes was significantly higher for a pathologist reading on a microscope than each of 2 pathologists reading on WSI. Differences were primarily due to more frequent classification of mucinous carcinomas as endometrioid with WSI. Pathologists had generally low agreement in identifying histologic features important to ovarian tumor subtype classification with either an optical microscopy or WSI. This result suggests the need for refined histologic criteria for identifying such features. Interobserver agreement was particularly low for identifying intracytoplasmic mucin with WSI. Inconsistencies in evaluating nuclear atypia and mitoses with WSI were also observed. CONCLUSIONS.—: Further research is needed to specify the reasons for these diagnostic challenges and to inform users and manufacturers of WSI technology