Cargando…
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...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4281379/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25552390 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-3148-0 |
_version_ | 1782350986361176064 |
---|---|
author | Olsen, Øystein E. |
author_facet | Olsen, Øystein E. |
author_sort | Olsen, Øystein E. |
collection | PubMed |
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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4281379 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42813792015-01-05 Why measure tumours? Olsen, Øystein E. Pediatr Radiol Research Forum 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. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2015-01-01 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4281379/ /pubmed/25552390 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-3148-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2014 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Forum Olsen, Øystein E. Why measure tumours? |
title | Why measure tumours? |
title_full | Why measure tumours? |
title_fullStr | Why measure tumours? |
title_full_unstemmed | Why measure tumours? |
title_short | Why measure tumours? |
title_sort | why measure tumours? |
topic | Research Forum |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4281379/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25552390 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-3148-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT olsenøysteine whymeasuretumours |