Evaluation, Optimization, and Validation of a Multiparametric CT Algorithm for Solid Renal Masses: CT-Score Version 2.0

用于评估、优化和验证肾脏实体肿块的多参数CT算法:CT评分2.0版

阅读:2

Abstract

Purpose To compare published CT-based systems for small solid renal mass (SoRM) assessment, propose modifications that may increase specificity and interreader agreement, and validate the revised system. Materials and Methods Our retrospective study included patients with histologically confirmed SoRMs measuring ≤4 cm who underwent CT imaging (single-institution internal dataset, n = 194; external dataset from The Cancer Imaging Archive, n = 55). Two blinded radiologists (readers 1 [R1] and 2 [R2]) compared four CT systems (CT score, modified CT score, abbreviated CT score, and UCLA CT score) for diagnostic accuracy in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and papillary RCC (pRCC) and for interreader agreement (Gwet agreement coefficient [AC1]). We also evaluated the addition of two decision rules to the best-performing algorithm (noncontrast CT [NCCT] attenuation ≤ 20 HU and corticomedullary phase-NCCT attenuation at two thresholds, ≤20 HU and ≤30 HU) to create a modified algorithm (CT-Score version 2.0). Results The abbreviated CT score had the best combination of accuracy for ccRCC (R1: 85% [95% CI: 79, 89], R2: 72% [95% CI: 65, 78]) and pRCC (R1: 86% [95% CI: 80, 91], R2: 86% [95% CI: 80, 91]) and interreader agreement (Gwet AC1 = 0.53). CT-Score version 2.0 (derived by adding decision rules to the abbreviated CT score) demonstrated substantial agreement (Gwet AC1 = 0.63). Specificity of CT-Score version 2.0 was higher for ccRCC (R1: 99% [95% CI: 94, 100], R2: 99% [95% CI: 94, 100] vs R1: 92% [95% CI: 84, 96], R2: 81% [95% CI: 72, 89]; P = .02, P < .001) and pRCC (R1: 100% [95% CI: 98, 100], R2: 100% [95% CI: 98, 100] vs R1: 93% [95% CI: 87, 96], R2: 93% [95% CI: 87, 96]; P = .003, P = .003) when compared with the abbreviated CT score. Validation in the external dataset showed similar results: Gwet AC1 = 0.53; specificity for ccRCC (R1: 100% [95% CI: 83, 100], R2: 100% [95% CI: 83, 100]); and specificity for pRCC (R1: 100% [95% CI: 82, 100], R2: 100% [95% CI: 92, 100]). Conclusion Application of CT-Score version 2.0 resulted in modest improvements in interreader agreement and high specificity for ccRCC and pRCC diagnosis. Keywords: CT, Kidney, Urinary, Oncology, Renal Mass, Algorithm, Clear Cell RCC, Papillary RCC Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2026.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。