Quick Search:

uzh logo
Browse by:

Zurich Open Repository and Archive

Maintenance: Tuesday, July the 26th 2016, 07:00-10:00

ZORA's new graphical user interface will be relaunched (For further infos watch out slideshow ZORA: Neues Look & Feel). There will be short interrupts on ZORA Service between 07:00am and 10:00 am. Please be patient.

Permanent URL to this publication: http://dx.doi.org/10.5167/uzh-36191

Bhure, U N; Lardinois, D; Kalff, V; Hany, T F; Soltermann, A; Seifert, Burkhardt; Steinert, H C (2010). Accuracy of CT parameters for assessment of tumour size and aggressiveness in lung adenocarcinoma with bronchoalveolar elements. British Journal of Radiology, 83(994):841-849.

[img] PDF - Registered users only
View at publisher


Accurate determination of tumour size in lung adenocarcinoma with bronchoalveolar features (BAC) is important for the determination of TNM (tumour, nodes, metastasis) scores used in staging, prognosis and therapy response assessment. However, tumour sizes derived using lung window (LW) CT or soft-tissue/mediastinal window (MW) CT often give different results. This study examines which measurement correlates best with actual tumour size and which best identifies advanced disease. This retrospective study included 43 BAC patients who underwent surgical resection with mediastinal lymphadenectomy <4 weeks post CT scan. The largest unidimensional tumour diameter on each CT window was compared with actual histopathological tumour size (HP). LW, MW and HP size measurements and a recently described CT parameter - the modified tumour shadow disappearance rate (mTDR) = (1 - [MW/LW]) - were then used to determine which parameter best discriminated between the presence or absence of advanced disease. There was no difference between HP and LW sizes, but MW significantly underestimated HP size (p<0.0001). Unlike MW (p = 0.01) and mTDR (p = 0.001), neither HP (p = 0.14) nor LW (p = 0.10) distinguished between patients with or without advanced disease. On receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis at a cut-off of ≤0.13, the sensitivity and specificity of mTDR for detecting advanced disease were 69% and 89%, respectively. In patients with tumours ≤3 cm, only mTDR remained a significant predictor of advanced disease (p = 0.017), with best cut-off at ≤0.20, giving a sensitivity and specificity of 71% and 94%, respectively. MW better predicts advanced disease than LW and might also need to be recorded for RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumours) assessment for T staging of BAC; however, mTDR appears to be an even better predictor and should also be used.


10 citations in Web of Science®
10 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™



2 downloads since deposited on 02 Dec 2010
0 downloads since 12 months

Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Institute of Surgical Pathology
04 Faculty of Medicine > Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI)
04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Nuclear Medicine
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Deposited On:02 Dec 2010 09:58
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 14:16
Publisher:British Institute of Radiology
Publisher DOI:10.1259/bjr/13711326
PubMed ID:20846983

Users (please log in): suggest update or correction for this item

Repository Staff Only: item control page