M. Guerra-Gómez, A. Rodríguez-Pajuelo, L. Brero-Sánchez, J.I. Cuenca-Cuenca, R.M. Álvarez-Pérez, J.M. Freire-Macías, J.M. Jiménez-Hoyuela García
{"title":"Interobserver and intraobserver agreement in PET/CT with [18F]DCFPyL according to TNM molecular and PSMA-RADS 2.0 criteria","authors":"M. Guerra-Gómez, A. Rodríguez-Pajuelo, L. Brero-Sánchez, J.I. Cuenca-Cuenca, R.M. Álvarez-Pérez, J.M. Freire-Macías, J.M. Jiménez-Hoyuela García","doi":"10.1016/j.remnie.2024.500047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>The aim of this study was to determine the agreement between three observers with different levels of experience using the PSMA-RADS 2.0 criteria and the miTNM system for the interpretation of PET-PSMA with [<sup>18</sup>F]DCFPyL in males with prostate cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><p>PET-PSMA images from 114 prostate cancer patients were blindly reported twice by three different observers at intervals of 8 weeks. The evaluations were performed according to the molecular imaging TNM (miTNM) and PSMA-RADS 2.0 criteria. We used Fleiss’ Kappa to analyse inter and intraobserver agreements.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Moderate overall agreement was obtained in the assessment of the PET-PSMA results (Fleiss'k = 0.53; 95% CI 0.45−0.62; p < 0.001), with significant agreement in the miT, miN and miM reports. There was a substantial level of agreement in the reporting of prostatic disease and lymphatic involvement (Fleiss'k = 0.66 and 0.65), being lower than that observed in the reporting of metastatic disease (Fleiss'k = 0.86), especially in the M0 group (Fleiss'k = 0.99). Upon re-evaluation of the images, observer 1 had moderate overall agreement for miT (Fleiss'k = 0.51) and substantial agreement for miN and miM (Fleiss'k 0.75 and 0.63, respectively).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The use of a structured scoring system such as PSMA-RADS 2.0, as well as the miTNM classification system in the interpretation of PET-PSMA images in prostate cancer patients, provides a highly reproducible report format. High levels of interobserver and intraobserver agreement are found, especially when ruling out disease, which supports its use in routine clinical practice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":94197,"journal":{"name":"Revista espanola de medicina nuclear e imagen molecular","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista espanola de medicina nuclear e imagen molecular","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2253808924000727","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study was to determine the agreement between three observers with different levels of experience using the PSMA-RADS 2.0 criteria and the miTNM system for the interpretation of PET-PSMA with [18F]DCFPyL in males with prostate cancer.
Materials and Methods
PET-PSMA images from 114 prostate cancer patients were blindly reported twice by three different observers at intervals of 8 weeks. The evaluations were performed according to the molecular imaging TNM (miTNM) and PSMA-RADS 2.0 criteria. We used Fleiss’ Kappa to analyse inter and intraobserver agreements.
Results
Moderate overall agreement was obtained in the assessment of the PET-PSMA results (Fleiss'k = 0.53; 95% CI 0.45−0.62; p < 0.001), with significant agreement in the miT, miN and miM reports. There was a substantial level of agreement in the reporting of prostatic disease and lymphatic involvement (Fleiss'k = 0.66 and 0.65), being lower than that observed in the reporting of metastatic disease (Fleiss'k = 0.86), especially in the M0 group (Fleiss'k = 0.99). Upon re-evaluation of the images, observer 1 had moderate overall agreement for miT (Fleiss'k = 0.51) and substantial agreement for miN and miM (Fleiss'k 0.75 and 0.63, respectively).
Conclusions
The use of a structured scoring system such as PSMA-RADS 2.0, as well as the miTNM classification system in the interpretation of PET-PSMA images in prostate cancer patients, provides a highly reproducible report format. High levels of interobserver and intraobserver agreement are found, especially when ruling out disease, which supports its use in routine clinical practice.