Revisiting the relationship between tumour volume and diameter in advanced NSCLC patients: An exercise to maximize the utility of each measure to assess response to therapy

• Published in: Clinical radiology Vol. 69; no. 8; pp. 841 - 848
• Main Authors: Nishino, M, Jackman, D.M, DiPiro, P.J, Hatabu, H, Jänne, P.A, Johnson, B.E
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Elsevier Ltd 01-08-2014
• Subjects: Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung - diagnostic imaging; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung - drug therapy; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung - pathology; Contrast Media; Erlotinib Hydrochloride; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods; Iohexol - analogs & derivatives; Lung Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Lung Neoplasms - drug therapy; Lung Neoplasms - pathology; Male; Multidetector Computed Tomography - methods; Neoplasm Staging; Protein Kinase Inhibitors - therapeutic use; Quinazolines - therapeutic use; Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods; Radiology; Reproducibility of Results; Treatment Outcome; Tumor Burden
• ISSN: 0009-9260; 1365-229X
• DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2014.03.020

Aim To revisit the presumed relationship between tumour diameter and volume in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, and determine whether the measured volume using volume-analysis software and its proportional changes during therapy matches with the calculated volume obtained from the presumed relationship and results in concordant response assessment. Materials and methods Twenty-three patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC with a total of 53 measurable lung lesions, treated in a phase II trial of erlotinib, were studied with institutional review board approval. Tumour volume and diameter were measured at baseline and at the first follow-up computed tomography (CT) examination using volume-analysis software. Using the measured diameter (2r) and the equation, calculated volume was obtained as (4/3)πr3 at baseline and at the follow-up. Percent volume change was obtained by comparing to baseline for measured and calculated volumes, and response assessment was assigned. Results The measured volume was significantly smaller than the calculated volume at baseline (median 11,488.9 mm3 versus 17,148.6 mm3 ; p  < 0.0001), with a concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) of 0.7022. At follow-up, the measured volume was once again significantly smaller than the calculated volume (median 6573.5 mm3 versus 9198.1 mm3 ; p  = 0.0022), with a CCC of 0.7408. Response assessment by calculated versus measured volume changes had only moderate agreement (weighted κ = 0.545), with discordant assessment results in 20% (8/40) of lesions. Conclusion Calculated volume based on the presumed relationship significantly differed from the measured volume in advanced NSCLC patients, with only moderate concordance in response assessment, indicating the limitations of presumed relationship.