Pulmonary Tumor Measurements from X-Ray Computed Tomography in One, Two, and Three Dimensions

Rationale and Objectives We evaluated the accuracy and reproducibility of three-dimensional (3D) measurements of lung phantoms and patient tumors from x-ray computed tomography (CT) and compared these to one-dimensional (1D) and two-dimensional (2D) measurements. Materials and Methods CT images of three spherical and three irregularly shaped tumor phantoms were evaluated by three observers who performed five repeated measurements. Additionally, three observers manually segmented 29 patient lung tumors five times each. Follow-up imaging was performed for 23 tumors and response criteria were compared. For a single subject, imaging was performed on nine occasions over 2 years to evaluate multidimensional tumor response. To evaluate measurement accuracy, we compared imaging measurements to ground truth using analysis of variance. For estimates of precision, intraobserver and interobserver coefficients of variation and intraclass correlations (ICC) were used. Linear regression and Pearson correlations were used to evaluate agreement and tumor response was descriptively compared. Results For spherical shaped phantoms, all measurements were highly accurate, but for irregularly shaped phantoms, only 3D measurements were in high agreement with ground truth measurements. All phantom and patient measurements showed high intra- and interobserver reproducibility (ICC >0.900). Over a 2-year period for a single patient, there was disagreement between tumor response classifications based on 3D measurements and those generated using 1D and 2D measurements. Conclusion Tumor volume measurements were highly reproducible and accurate for irregular, spherical phantoms and patient tumors with nonuniform dimensions. Response classifications obtained from multidimensional measurements suggest that 3D measurements provide higher sensitivity to tumor response.