JNM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

First published online September 16, 2009, 10.2967/jnumed.109.064121
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
jnumed.109.064121v1
50/10/1594    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in JNM
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hofman, M. S.
Right arrow Articles by O'Doherty, M. J.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hofman, M. S.
Right arrow Articles by O'Doherty, M. J.
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Vol. 50 No. 10 1594-1597
© 2009 by Society of Nuclear Medicine
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.109.064121

Clinical Investigation

Observer Variation in Interpreting 18F-FDG PET/CT Findings for Lymphoma Staging

Michael S. Hofman1–3, Nigel C. Smeeton4, Sheila C. Rankin1,2, Tom Nunan1,2 and Michael J. O'Doherty1,2

1 PET Imaging Centre, Kings College London, London, United Kingdom; 2 Division of Imaging, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; 3 Centre for Molecular Imaging, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; and 4 Division of Health and Social Care Research, King's College London, London, United Kingdom

Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: Michael S. Hofman, Centre for Molecular Imaging, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag 1, A'Beckett St., Melbourne 8006, Australia. E-mail: nucmedpet{at}drhofman.com

Many studies demonstrate a high accuracy for PET in staging lymphoma, but few assess observer variation. This study quantified agreement for staging lymphoma with PET/CT. Methods: The PET/CT images of 100 patients with lymphoma who had been referred for staging were reviewed by 3 experienced observers, with 2 observers reviewing each series a second time. Ann Arbor stage and individual nodal and extranodal regions were assessed. Weighted {kappa} ({kappa}w) and intraclass correlation coefficient were used to compare ratings. Results: Intra- and interobserver agreement was high for Ann Arbor stage ({kappa}w = 0.79–0.91), number of nodal regions involved (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.83–0.93), and presence of extranodal disease ({kappa} = 0.74–0.86). High agreement was also observed for all nodal regions ({kappa}w > 0.60) except hilar ({kappa}w = 0.56–0.82) and infraclavicular ({kappa}w = 0.14–0.55). Lower agreement was observed for bowel involvement ({kappa}w = 0.37–0.71). Conclusion: Experienced observers had a high level of agreement using PET/CT for lymphoma staging, supporting its use as a robust noninvasive staging tool. Further research is needed to evaluate observer variability for restaging during and after chemotherapy.

Key Words: fluorodeoxyglucose • FDG • positron emission tomography • PET/CT • lymphoma • reporter agreement

COPYRIGHT © 2009 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.


Related articles in JNM:

This Month in JNM

JNM 2009 50: 11A-12A. [Full Text]  





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Copyright © 2009 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine.