Software-assisted structured reporting and semi-automated TNM classification for NSCLC staging in a multicenter proof of concept study.
Lung
Non-small-cell lung carcinoma
PET-CT
TNM classification
Journal
Insights into imaging
ISSN: 1869-4101
Titre abrégé: Insights Imaging
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101532453
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Oct 2024
28 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
08
07
2024
accepted:
28
09
2024
medline:
28
10
2024
pubmed:
28
10
2024
entrez:
28
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In this multi-center study, we proposed a structured reporting (SR) framework for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and developed a software-assisted tool to automatically translate image-based findings and annotations into TNM classifications. The aim of this study was to validate the software-assisted SR tool for NSCLC, assess its potential clinical impact in a proof-of-concept study, and evaluate current reporting standards in participating institutions. A framework for SR and staging of NSCLC was developed in a multi-center collaboration. SR annotations and descriptions were used to generate semi-automated TNM classification. The SR and TNM classification tools were evaluated by nine radiologists on n = 20 representative [18F]FDG PET/CT studies and compared to the free text reporting (FTR) strategy. Results were compared to a multidisciplinary team reference using a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM). Additionally, participants were surveyed on their experience with SR and TNM classification. Overall, GLMM analysis revealed that readers using SR were 1.707 (CI: 1.137-2.585) times more likely to correctly classify TNM status compared to FTR strategy (p = 0.01) resulting in increased overall TNM correctness in 71.9% (128/178) of cases compared to 62.8% (113/180) FTR. The primary source of variation in classification accuracy was explained by case complexity. Participants rated the potential impact of SR and semi-automated TNM classification as positive across all categories with improved scores after template validation. This multi-center study yielded an effective software-assisted SR framework for NSCLC. The SR and semi-automated classification tool improved TNM classification and were perceived as valuable. Software-assisted SR provides robust input for semi-automated rule-based TNM classification in non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), improves TNM correctness compared to FTR, and was perceived as valuable by radiology physicians. SR and TNM classification are underutilized across participating centers for NSCLC staging. Software-assisted SR has emerged as a promising strategy for oncologic assessment. Software-assisted SR facilitates semi-automated TNM classification with improved staging accuracy compared to free-text reports in NSCLC.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39466506
doi: 10.1186/s13244-024-01836-z
pii: 10.1186/s13244-024-01836-z
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
258Subventions
Organisme : German Research Foundation (DFG)
ID : EXC 2145 SyNergy - ID 390857198
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Andersen RD, Vils Pedersen MR, Hesseldal L, Rafaelsen SR (2023) Using structured templates or free text style in reporting CT staging on colon cancer: a national survey. Acta Radiol 64:1765–1769
doi: 10.1177/02841851221142226
pubmed: 36575645
Dewey M, Bosserdt M, Dodd JD, Thun S, Kressel HY (2019) Clinical imaging research: higher evidence, global collaboration, improved reporting, and data sharing are the grand challenges. Radiology 291:547–552
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019181796
pubmed: 30938629
Dobranowski J, Sommer W (2019) Structured radiology reporting: addressing the communication quality gap. SN Compr Clin Med 1:397–407
doi: 10.1007/s42399-019-00066-5
Flusberg M, Ganeles J, Ekinci T et al (2017) Impact of a structured report template on the quality of CT and MRI reports for hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis. J Am Coll Radiol 14:1206–1211
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.02.050
pubmed: 28483546
Granata V, Pradella S, Cozzi D et al (2021) Computed tomography structured reporting in the staging of lymphoma: a Delphi consensus proposal. J Clin Med 10:4007
doi: 10.3390/jcm10174007
pubmed: 34501455
pmcid: 8432477
Leithner D, Sala E, Neri E et al (2024) Perceptions of radiologists on structured reporting for cancer imaging-a survey by the European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI). Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-10397-6
Granata V, De Muzio F, Cutolo C et al (2022) Structured reporting in radiological settings: pitfalls and perspectives. J Pers Med 12:1344
doi: 10.3390/jpm12081344
pubmed: 36013293
pmcid: 9409900
Granata V, Grassi R, Miele V et al (2021) Structured reporting of lung cancer staging: a consensus proposal. Diagnostics 11:1569
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11091569
pubmed: 34573911
pmcid: 8465460
European Society of R (2023) ESR paper on structured reporting in radiology-update 2023. Insights Imaging 14:199
doi: 10.1186/s13244-023-01560-0
Nobel JM, Kok EM, Robben SGF (2020) Redefining the structure of structured reporting in radiology. Insights Imaging 11:10
doi: 10.1186/s13244-019-0831-6
pubmed: 32020396
pmcid: 7000576
Morgan TA, Helibrun ME, Kahn CE Jr (2014) Reporting initiative of the Radiological Society of North America: progress and new directions. Radiology 273:642–645
doi: 10.1148/radiol.14141227
pubmed: 25420164
Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D (2011) Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 61:69–90
doi: 10.3322/caac.20107
pubmed: 21296855
Thai AA, Solomon BJ, Sequist LV, Gainor JF, Heist RS (2021) Lung cancer. Lancet 398:535–554
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00312-3
pubmed: 34273294
Expert Panel on Thoracic I, de Groot PM, Chung JH et al (2019) ACR appropriateness criteria((R)) noninvasive clinical staging of primary lung cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 16:S184–S195
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2019.02.008
Lichtenberger JP 3rd (2022) Reporting of clinical stage for lung cancer: point-yes, report an overall TNM stage. AJR Am J Roentgenol 218:954–955
doi: 10.2214/AJR.21.27203
pubmed: 34910535
Perez-Johnston R, McDermott S (2022) Reporting of clinical stage for lung cancer: counterpoint-we are not there yet!. AJR Am J Roentgenol 218:956–957
doi: 10.2214/AJR.21.27188
pubmed: 34910532
Detterbeck FC, Boffa DJ, Kim AW, Tanoue LT (2017) The eighth edition lung cancer stage classification. Chest 151:193–203
doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2016.10.010
pubmed: 27780786
Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 15:155–163
doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
pubmed: 27330520
pmcid: 4913118
Sauerbrei W, Haeussler T, Balmford J, Huebner M (2022) Structured reporting to improve transparency of analyses in prognostic marker studies. BMC Med 20:184
doi: 10.1186/s12916-022-02304-5
pubmed: 35546237
pmcid: 9095054
Jorg T, Halfmann MC, Arnhold G et al (2023) Implementation of structured reporting in clinical routine: a review of 7 years of institutional experience. Insights Imaging 14:61
doi: 10.1186/s13244-023-01408-7
pubmed: 37037963
pmcid: 10086081
Marcovici PA, Taylor GA (2014) Journal club: structured radiology reports are more complete and more effective than unstructured reports. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:1265–1271
doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.12636
pubmed: 25415704
Bosmans JM, Peremans L, Menni M, De Schepper AM, Duyck PO, Parizel PM (2012) Structured reporting: If, why, when, how and at what expense? Results of a focus group meeting of radiology professionals from eight countries. Insights Imaging 3:295–302
doi: 10.1007/s13244-012-0148-1
pubmed: 22696090
pmcid: 3369122
Burns J, Catanzano TM, Schaefer PW et al (2022) Structured reports and radiology residents: Friends or foes? Acad Radiol 29:S43–S47
doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2020.10.014
pubmed: 33160861
Johnson AJ, Chen MY, Zapadka ME, Lyders EM, Littenberg B (2010) Radiology report clarity: a cohort study of structured reporting compared with conventional dictation. J Am Coll Radiol 7:501–506
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2010.02.008
pubmed: 20630384
Ristow I, Well L, Wiese NJ et al (2024) Tumor response evaluation using iRECIST: feasibility and reliability of manual versus software-assisted assessments. Cancers 16:993
doi: 10.3390/cancers16050993
pubmed: 38473353
pmcid: 10931003
Weiss DL, Langlotz CP (2008) Structured reporting: patient care enhancement or productivity nightmare? Radiology 249:739–747
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2493080988
pubmed: 19011178
Rankin NM, McWilliams A, Marshall HM (2020) Lung cancer screening implementation: complexities and priorities. Respirology 25:5–23
doi: 10.1111/resp.13963
pubmed: 33200529
Kahn CE Jr, Heilbrun ME, Applegate KE (2013) From guidelines to practice: how reporting templates promote the use of radiology practice guidelines. J Am Coll Radiol 10:268–273
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2012.09.025
pubmed: 23332496
pmcid: 3615027
Vosshenrich J, Brantner P, Cyriac J et al (2023) Quantifying the effects of structured reporting on report turnaround times and proofreading workload in neuroradiology. Acad Radiol 30:727–736
doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2022.05.011
pubmed: 35691879
Detterbeck FC, Woodard GA, Bader AS et al (2024) The proposed 9th edition TNM classification of lung cancer. Chest. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2024.05.026