Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Jul;26(7):2291-6.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-4051-2. Epub 2015 Oct 7.

Is there a systematic bias of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements of the breast if measured on different workstations? An inter- and intra-reader agreement study

Affiliations

Is there a systematic bias of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements of the breast if measured on different workstations? An inter- and intra-reader agreement study

Paola Clauser et al. Eur Radiol. 2016 Jul.

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the influence of post-processing systems, intra- and inter-reader agreement on the variability of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements in breast lesions.

Methods: Forty-one patients with 41 biopsy-proven breast lesions gave their informed consent and were included in this prospective IRB-approved study. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations were performed at 1.5 T using an EPI-DWI sequence, with b-values of 0 and 1000 s/mm(2). Two radiologists (R1, R2) reviewed the images in separate sessions and measured the ADC for lesion, using MRI-workstation (S-WS), PACS-workstation (P-WS) and a commercial DICOM viewer (O-SW). Agreement was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman plots and coefficient of variation (CV).

Results: Thirty-one malignant, two high-risk and eight benign mass-like lesions were analysed. Intra-reader agreement was almost perfect (ICC-R1 = 0.974; ICC-R2 = 0.990) while inter-reader agreement was substantial (ICC from 0.615 to 0.682). Bland-Altman plots revealed a significant bias in ADC values measured between O-SW and S-WS (P = 0.025), no further systematic differences were identified. CV varied from 6.8 % to 7.9 %.

Conclusion: Post-processing systems may have a significant, although minor, impact on ADC measurements in breast lesions. While intra-reader agreement is high, the main source of ADC variability seems to be caused by inter-reader variation.

Key points: • ADC provides quantitative information on breast lesions independent from the system used. • ADC measurement using different workstations and software systems is generally reliable. • Systematic, but minor, differences may occur between different post-processing systems. • Inter-reader agreement of ADC measurements exceeded intra-reader agreement.

Keywords: Apparent Diffusion Coefficient; Breast; Diffusion-weighted Imaging; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Observer Variation.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014 Dec;40(6):1375-81 - PubMed
    1. Eur Radiol. 2010 May;20(5):1101-10 - PubMed
    1. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Jun;194(6):1664-73 - PubMed
    1. Radiographics. 2011 Jul-Aug;31(4):1059-84 - PubMed
    1. Eur Radiol. 2014 Nov;24(11):2835-47 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources