IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0153840.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inter- and Intra-Observer Repeatability of Quantitative Whole-Body, Diffusion-Weighted Imaging (WBDWI) in Metastatic Bone Disease

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew D Blackledge
  • Nina Tunariu
  • Matthew R Orton
  • Anwar R Padhani
  • David J Collins
  • Martin O Leach
  • Dow-Mu Koh

Abstract

Quantitative whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI (WB-DWI) is now possible using semi-automatic segmentation techniques. The method enables whole-body estimates of global Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (gADC) and total Diffusion Volume (tDV), both of which have demonstrated considerable utility for assessing treatment response in patients with bone metastases from primary prostate and breast cancers. Here we investigate the agreement (inter-observer repeatability) between two radiologists in their definition of Volumes Of Interest (VOIs) and subsequent assessment of tDV and gADC on an exploratory patient cohort of nine. Furthermore, each radiologist was asked to repeat his or her measurements on the same patient data sets one month later to identify the intra-observer repeatability of the technique. Using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) estimation method provided full posterior probabilities of repeatability measures along with maximum a-posteriori values and 95% confidence intervals. Our estimates of the inter-observer Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICCinter) for log-tDV and median gADC were 1.00 (0.97–1.00) and 0.99 (0.89–0.99) respectively, indicating excellent observer agreement for these metrics. Mean gADC values were found to have ICCinter = 0.97 (0.81–0.99) indicating a slight sensitivity to outliers in the derived distributions of gADC. Of the higher order gADC statistics, skewness was demonstrated to have good inter-user agreement with ICCinter = 0.99 (0.86–1.00), whereas gADC variance and kurtosis performed relatively poorly: 0.89 (0.39–0.97) and 0.96 (0.69–0.99) respectively. Estimates of intra-observer repeatability (ICCintra) demonstrated similar results: 0.99 (0.95–1.00) for log-tDV, 0.98 (0.89–0.99) and 0.97 (0.83–0.99) for median and mean gADC respectively, 0.64 (0.25–0.88) for gADC variance, 0.85 (0.57–0.95) for gADC skewness and 0.85 (0.57–0.95) for gADC kurtosis. Further investigation of two anomalous patient cases revealed that a very small proportion of voxels with outlying gADC values lead to instability in higher order gADC statistics. We therefore conclude that estimates of median/mean gADC and tumour volume demonstrate excellent inter- and intra-observer repeatability whilst higher order statistics of gADC should be used with caution when ascribing significance to clinical changes.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew D Blackledge & Nina Tunariu & Matthew R Orton & Anwar R Padhani & David J Collins & Martin O Leach & Dow-Mu Koh, 2016. "Inter- and Intra-Observer Repeatability of Quantitative Whole-Body, Diffusion-Weighted Imaging (WBDWI) in Metastatic Bone Disease," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-12, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0153840
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0153840
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0153840
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0153840&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0153840?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0153840. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.