Search

The aim of the present study was to investigate the difference in doubling time between squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma of solid pulmonary cancer using three-dimensional volumetric software. We included 40 patients with adenocarcinoma and 11 patients with SCC, who underwent CT examinations more than once before surgical treatment. Tumor volumes and doubling times were obtained using three-dimensional volumetric computer software. Statistical analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney's U-test except for negative doubling times (doubling times less than 0 day). Negative doubling time was found in 5 of the 40 adenocarcinomas (13%), but not in any of the patients with SCC. Doubling time was beyond 400 days in 11 of the 40 adenocarcinomas (28%), but was always less than 400 days in SCC. The mean doubling time of SCC was 126+/-58 days (range, 39-221 days; median, 131 days), while that of adenocarcinomas, except for the negative doubling times, was 976+/-3134 days (range, 69-18,678 days; median, 258 days). Doubling time differed significantly between adenocarcinomas and SCC (p<0.01). In conclusion, the median doubling time of SCC lung cancers is less than that of adenocarcinomas, as measured with automated volumetric measurement software.

The purpose of our investigation was to compare the usefulness of the subjective visual assessment of ground-glass opacity (GGO) with a quantitative method that used a profile curve to determine prognosis. 96 adenocarcinomas were studied. Three diameters ([D1]-[D3]) were defined for estimating the diameter of tumours on the monitor: the distance between two points was measured using software that displays a CT density profile across the tumour. One experienced and one less experienced radiologist independently evaluated the following six parameters: the three diameters [D1]-[D3]; the solid portion of total tumour in the two different ratios ([D2]/[D1], [D3]/[D1]); and the area ratio of GGO for total opacity to subjective visual evaluation. Interobserver agreement between the two radiologists of the diameters (mean bias+/- 1.96 standard deviations) was as follows: [D1], -0.7 +/- 6 mm; [D2], 0.4 +/- 4.4 mm; and [D3], -0.1 +/- 4.2 mm (Bland and Altman's method). Interobserver agreement was fair in evaluating the area ratio of GGO (kappa test, kappa = 0.309). Univariate logistic regression analysis revealed that two ratios ([D2]/[D1], [D3]/[D1]) might be significantly useful in estimating lymph node metastasis (p < 0.026), lymph duct invasion (p < 0.001) and recurrence (p < 0.015). Observation of the area ratio of GGO by an experienced radiologist would be necessary for estimating lymph node metastasis (p = 0.04) and lymph duct invasion (p < 0.001). We concluded that the ratio of solid component to total tumour, which is obtainable in a more objective and simple way using profile curves obtained by software, is a more useful method of estimating prognosis than is visual assessment.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate software designed to calculate whole tumor volumes and the ratio of the solid component to whole volume (%solid) in pulmonary nodules with ground-glass opacity in three dimensions., Methods: The study included 49 patients with histologically diagnosed adenocarcinomas smaller than 2 cm in diameter. The %solid was calculated both automatically using new software, and by manual measurement of the following four parameters by two observers: the ratio of the largest diameter (a) and the area (b) at the mediastinal window to those at the lung window, and the ratio of the largest diameter (c) and the area (d) of the solid component to those of the ground-glass component at the lung window. Agreement of intra- and inter-observer data by both Spearman's rank correlation test and Bland-Altman's method, and a comparison by Spearman's rank correlation test of the %solid in both Noguchi sub-classifications and vessel invasion in histologic specimens, between the software and manual methods, were assessed., Results: Of the 49 nodules, 48 were successfully measured and assessed. The agreement of the observers with the software was better (Bland-Altman's method; mean difference, -0.3%; 95% limits of agreement, -3.1 to 2.5%) than with the manual measurements (a: 5.3%, -17.6 to 28.3%; b: 8.3%, -10.6 to 26.9%; c: 10.7%, -17.6 to 39%; d: 6.4%, -22 to 34.8%). The correlation between %solid and the histological group was worse with the software (Spearman's rank correlation test; r=0.487, p<0.001) than with the manual method (a, r=0.534; b, r=0.557; c, r=0.552; d, r=0.545)., Conclusion: Although the software requires improvement in the calculation of %solid with volumetric analysis, this is a reproducible and promising quantitative method for determining the grades of malignancy of small lung cancers.