Why measure tumours?

This article questions the scientific justification of ingrained radiologic practices exemplified by size measurements of childhood solid tumours. This is approached by a critical review of staging systems from a selection of paediatric oncological treatment protocols. Local staging remains size-dep...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pediatric radiology 2015, Vol.45 (1), p.35-41
1. Verfasser: Olsen, Øystein E.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 41
container_issue 1
container_start_page 35
container_title Pediatric radiology
container_volume 45
creator Olsen, Øystein E.
description This article questions the scientific justification of ingrained radiologic practices exemplified by size measurements of childhood solid tumours. This is approached by a critical review of staging systems from a selection of paediatric oncological treatment protocols. Local staging remains size-dependent for some tumour types. The consequent stage assignment can significantly influence treatment intensity. Still, the protocols tend not to give precise guidance on how to perform scans and standardise measurements. Also, they do not estimate or account for the inevitable variability in measurements. Counts and measurements of lung nodules are, within some tumour groups, used for diagnosis of metastatic disease. There is, however, no evidence that nodule size is a useful discriminator of benign and malignant lung nodules. The efficacy of imaging depends chiefly on observations being precise, accurate and valid for the desired diagnostic purpose. Because measurements without estimates of their errors are meaningless, studies of variability dependent on tumour shape and location, imaging device and observer need to be encouraged. Reproducible observations make good candidates for staging parameters if they have prognostic validity and at the same time show little covariation with (thereby adding new information to) the existing staging system. The lack of scientific rigour has made the validity of size measurement very difficult to assess. Action is needed, the most important being radiologists’ active contribution in development of oncological staging systems, attention to standardisation, knowledge about errors in measurement and protection against undue influence of such errors in the staging of the individual child.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s00247-014-3148-0
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4281379</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3541400631</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-e17e45b5097798e3dbc43c034ee17ce28ab6635d672ea5ebd4a8f57b9d07a9373</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kL1PwzAQxS0EoqWwsbCgSiwsgXNsx_ECQhVfUiUWEKPlJNc2VT6KnSD1v8chpSpITDe837279wg5o3BFAeS1Awi5DIDygFEeB7BHhpSzMKBKxftkCAxoAJyrATlybgkATFB2SAahECJkCobk9H2xHpdoXGtx3LRl3Vp3e0wOZqZweLKZI_L2cP86eQqmL4_Pk7tpkHIJTYBUIheJACWlipFlScpZCoyjV1IMY5NEERNZJEM0ApOMm3gmZKIykEYxyUbkpvddtUmJWYpVY02hVzYvjV3r2uT6t1LlCz2vPzUPY8qk8gaXGwNbf7ToGl3mLsWiMBXWrdM04jQWijHw6MUfdOmzVj7eN0VlTEX3Ee2p1NbOWZxtn6Ggu85137n2neuuc905n--m2G78lOyBsAecl6o52p3T_7p-ARxTiog</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1641178157</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Why measure tumours?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Olsen, Øystein E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Olsen, Øystein E.</creatorcontrib><description>This article questions the scientific justification of ingrained radiologic practices exemplified by size measurements of childhood solid tumours. This is approached by a critical review of staging systems from a selection of paediatric oncological treatment protocols. Local staging remains size-dependent for some tumour types. The consequent stage assignment can significantly influence treatment intensity. Still, the protocols tend not to give precise guidance on how to perform scans and standardise measurements. Also, they do not estimate or account for the inevitable variability in measurements. Counts and measurements of lung nodules are, within some tumour groups, used for diagnosis of metastatic disease. There is, however, no evidence that nodule size is a useful discriminator of benign and malignant lung nodules. The efficacy of imaging depends chiefly on observations being precise, accurate and valid for the desired diagnostic purpose. Because measurements without estimates of their errors are meaningless, studies of variability dependent on tumour shape and location, imaging device and observer need to be encouraged. Reproducible observations make good candidates for staging parameters if they have prognostic validity and at the same time show little covariation with (thereby adding new information to) the existing staging system. The lack of scientific rigour has made the validity of size measurement very difficult to assess. Action is needed, the most important being radiologists’ active contribution in development of oncological staging systems, attention to standardisation, knowledge about errors in measurement and protection against undue influence of such errors in the staging of the individual child.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0301-0449</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1998</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00247-014-3148-0</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25552390</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Diagnostic Imaging - standards ; Europe ; Humans ; Image Enhancement - standards ; Imaging ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Neoplasm Staging ; Neoplasms - pathology ; Neuroradiology ; Nuclear Medicine ; Oncology ; Pediatrics ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Radiology ; Radiology - standards ; Reproducibility of Results ; Research Forum ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Tumor Burden ; Ultrasound</subject><ispartof>Pediatric radiology, 2015, Vol.45 (1), p.35-41</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2014</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-e17e45b5097798e3dbc43c034ee17ce28ab6635d672ea5ebd4a8f57b9d07a9373</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-e17e45b5097798e3dbc43c034ee17ce28ab6635d672ea5ebd4a8f57b9d07a9373</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00247-014-3148-0$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00247-014-3148-0$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25552390$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Olsen, Øystein E.</creatorcontrib><title>Why measure tumours?</title><title>Pediatric radiology</title><addtitle>Pediatr Radiol</addtitle><addtitle>Pediatr Radiol</addtitle><description>This article questions the scientific justification of ingrained radiologic practices exemplified by size measurements of childhood solid tumours. This is approached by a critical review of staging systems from a selection of paediatric oncological treatment protocols. Local staging remains size-dependent for some tumour types. The consequent stage assignment can significantly influence treatment intensity. Still, the protocols tend not to give precise guidance on how to perform scans and standardise measurements. Also, they do not estimate or account for the inevitable variability in measurements. Counts and measurements of lung nodules are, within some tumour groups, used for diagnosis of metastatic disease. There is, however, no evidence that nodule size is a useful discriminator of benign and malignant lung nodules. The efficacy of imaging depends chiefly on observations being precise, accurate and valid for the desired diagnostic purpose. Because measurements without estimates of their errors are meaningless, studies of variability dependent on tumour shape and location, imaging device and observer need to be encouraged. Reproducible observations make good candidates for staging parameters if they have prognostic validity and at the same time show little covariation with (thereby adding new information to) the existing staging system. The lack of scientific rigour has made the validity of size measurement very difficult to assess. Action is needed, the most important being radiologists’ active contribution in development of oncological staging systems, attention to standardisation, knowledge about errors in measurement and protection against undue influence of such errors in the staging of the individual child.</description><subject>Diagnostic Imaging - standards</subject><subject>Europe</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image Enhancement - standards</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Neoplasm Staging</subject><subject>Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Neuroradiology</subject><subject>Nuclear Medicine</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>Practice Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Radiology - standards</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Research Forum</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Tumor Burden</subject><subject>Ultrasound</subject><issn>0301-0449</issn><issn>1432-1998</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kL1PwzAQxS0EoqWwsbCgSiwsgXNsx_ECQhVfUiUWEKPlJNc2VT6KnSD1v8chpSpITDe837279wg5o3BFAeS1Awi5DIDygFEeB7BHhpSzMKBKxftkCAxoAJyrATlybgkATFB2SAahECJkCobk9H2xHpdoXGtx3LRl3Vp3e0wOZqZweLKZI_L2cP86eQqmL4_Pk7tpkHIJTYBUIheJACWlipFlScpZCoyjV1IMY5NEERNZJEM0ApOMm3gmZKIykEYxyUbkpvddtUmJWYpVY02hVzYvjV3r2uT6t1LlCz2vPzUPY8qk8gaXGwNbf7ToGl3mLsWiMBXWrdM04jQWijHw6MUfdOmzVj7eN0VlTEX3Ee2p1NbOWZxtn6Ggu85137n2neuuc905n--m2G78lOyBsAecl6o52p3T_7p-ARxTiog</recordid><startdate>2015</startdate><enddate>2015</enddate><creator>Olsen, Øystein E.</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2015</creationdate><title>Why measure tumours?</title><author>Olsen, Øystein E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-e17e45b5097798e3dbc43c034ee17ce28ab6635d672ea5ebd4a8f57b9d07a9373</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Diagnostic Imaging - standards</topic><topic>Europe</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image Enhancement - standards</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Neoplasm Staging</topic><topic>Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Neuroradiology</topic><topic>Nuclear Medicine</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>Practice Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Radiology - standards</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Research Forum</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Tumor Burden</topic><topic>Ultrasound</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Olsen, Øystein E.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Proquest Nursing &amp; Allied Health Source</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Pediatric radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Olsen, Øystein E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Why measure tumours?</atitle><jtitle>Pediatric radiology</jtitle><stitle>Pediatr Radiol</stitle><addtitle>Pediatr Radiol</addtitle><date>2015</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>45</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>35</spage><epage>41</epage><pages>35-41</pages><issn>0301-0449</issn><eissn>1432-1998</eissn><abstract>This article questions the scientific justification of ingrained radiologic practices exemplified by size measurements of childhood solid tumours. This is approached by a critical review of staging systems from a selection of paediatric oncological treatment protocols. Local staging remains size-dependent for some tumour types. The consequent stage assignment can significantly influence treatment intensity. Still, the protocols tend not to give precise guidance on how to perform scans and standardise measurements. Also, they do not estimate or account for the inevitable variability in measurements. Counts and measurements of lung nodules are, within some tumour groups, used for diagnosis of metastatic disease. There is, however, no evidence that nodule size is a useful discriminator of benign and malignant lung nodules. The efficacy of imaging depends chiefly on observations being precise, accurate and valid for the desired diagnostic purpose. Because measurements without estimates of their errors are meaningless, studies of variability dependent on tumour shape and location, imaging device and observer need to be encouraged. Reproducible observations make good candidates for staging parameters if they have prognostic validity and at the same time show little covariation with (thereby adding new information to) the existing staging system. The lack of scientific rigour has made the validity of size measurement very difficult to assess. Action is needed, the most important being radiologists’ active contribution in development of oncological staging systems, attention to standardisation, knowledge about errors in measurement and protection against undue influence of such errors in the staging of the individual child.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>25552390</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00247-014-3148-0</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0301-0449
ispartof Pediatric radiology, 2015, Vol.45 (1), p.35-41
issn 0301-0449
1432-1998
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4281379
source MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Diagnostic Imaging - standards
Europe
Humans
Image Enhancement - standards
Imaging
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Neoplasm Staging
Neoplasms - pathology
Neuroradiology
Nuclear Medicine
Oncology
Pediatrics
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Radiology
Radiology - standards
Reproducibility of Results
Research Forum
Sensitivity and Specificity
Tumor Burden
Ultrasound
title Why measure tumours?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T21%3A08%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Why%20measure%20tumours?&rft.jtitle=Pediatric%20radiology&rft.au=Olsen,%20%C3%98ystein%20E.&rft.date=2015&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=35&rft.epage=41&rft.pages=35-41&rft.issn=0301-0449&rft.eissn=1432-1998&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00247-014-3148-0&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E3541400631%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1641178157&rft_id=info:pmid/25552390&rfr_iscdi=true