An artificial intelligence system trained with structured chest radiography reports provided clinically useful support for non-radiologist physicians. Background Supine chest radiography for bedridden patients in intensive care units (ICUs) is one of the most frequently ordered imaging studies worldwide. Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic perform...

Introduction: Target lesion selection is known to be a major factor for inter-reader discordance in RECIST 1.1. The purpose of this study was to assess whether volumetric measurements of target lesions result in different response categorization, as opposed to standard unidimensional measurements, and to evaluate the impact on inter-reader agreement for response categorization when different readers select different sets of target lesions.Material and methods: Fifty patients with measurable disease from solid tumours, in which 3 readers had blindly and independently selected different sets of target lesions and subsequently reached clinically significant discordant response categorizations (progressive disease [PD] vs. non-progressive disease [non-PD]) based on RECIST 1.1 analyses were included in this study. Additional volumetric measurements of all target lesions were performed by the same readers in a second read. Intra-reader agreement between standard unidimensional measurements (uRECIST) and volumetric measurements (vRECIST) was assessed using Cohen’s k statistics. Fleiss k statistics was used to analyse the inter-reader agreement for uRECIST and vRECIST results.Results: The 3 readers assigned the same response classifications based on uRECIST and vRECIST in 33/50 (66%), 42/50 patients (84%), and 44/50 patients (88%), respectively. Inter-reader agreement improved from 0% when using uRECIST to 36% when using vRECIST.Conclusions: Volumetric measurement of target lesions may improve inter-reader variability for response assessment as opposed to standard unidimensional measurements. However, in about two-thirds of patients, readers disagreed regardless of the measurement method, indicating that a limited set of target lesions may not be sufficiently representative of the whole-body tumour burden.

The aim of this study was to identify prognostic factors affecting intrahepatic progression-free survival (ihPFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM) undergoing portal vein embolization (PVE) and subsequent (extended) right hemihepatectomy. A total of 59 patients (mean age: 60.8 ± 9.3 years) with CRCLM who underwent PVE in preparation for right hemihepatectomy were included. IhPFS and OS after PVE were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Cox regression analyses were conducted to investigate the association between the following factors and survival: patient age, laterality of the colorectal cancer (right- versus left-sided), tumor location (colon versus rectal cancer), time of occurrence of hepatic metastases (synchronous versus metachronous), baseline number and size of hepatic metastases, presence or absence of metastases in the future liver remnant (FLR) before PVE, preoperative carcinoembryogenic antigen (CEA) levels, time between PVE and surgery, history of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy, and the presence or absence of extrahepatic disease before PVE. Median follow up was 18 months. The median ihPFS was 8.2 months (95% confidence interval: 6.2–10.2 months), and median OS was 34.1 months (95% confidence interval: 27.3–40.9 months). Laterality of the primary colorectal cancer was the only statistically significant predictor of ihPFS after PVE (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.242; 95% confidence interval: 1.125, 4.465; p = 0.022), with patients with right-sided colorectal cancer having significantly shorter median ihPFS than patients with left-sided cancer (4.0 ± 1.9 months versus 10.2 ± 1.5 months; log rank test: p = 0.018). Other factors, in particular also the presence or absence of additional metastases in the FLR, were not associated with intrahepatic progression-free survival. The presence of extrahepatic disease was associated with worse OS (HR = 3.050, 95% confidence interval: 1.247, 7.459; p = 0.015).