• Something wrong with this record ?

Ultrasound examiners' ability to describe ovarian cancer spread using preacquired ultrasound videoclips from a selected patient sample with high prevalence of cancer spread

D. Fischerova, P. Pinto, M. Pesta, M. Blasko, MC. Moruzzi, AC. Testa, D. Franchi, V. Chiappa, JL. Alcázar, M. Wiesnerova, D. Cibula, L. Valentin, collaborators

. 2025 ; 65 (5) : 641-652. [pub] 20250418

Language English Country England, Great Britain

Document type Journal Article, Multicenter Study, Observational Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Persistent link   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc25015853

Grant support
NV19-03-00552 Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic (Czech Health Research Council)

OBJECTIVES: To assess the ability, as well as factors affecting the ability, of ultrasound examiners with different levels of ultrasound experience to detect correctly infiltration of ovarian cancer in predefined anatomical locations, and to evaluate the inter-rater agreement regarding the presence or absence of cancer infiltration, using preacquired ultrasound videoclips obtained in a selected patient sample with a high prevalence of cancer spread. METHODS: This study forms part of the Imaging Study in Advanced ovArian Cancer multicenter observational study (NCT03808792). Ultrasound videoclips showing assessment of infiltration of ovarian cancer were obtained by the principal investigator (an ultrasound expert, who did not participate in rating) at 19 predefined anatomical sites in the abdomen and pelvis, including five sites that, if infiltrated, would indicate tumor non-resectability. For each site, there were 10 videoclips showing cancer infiltration and 10 showing no cancer infiltration. The reference standard was either findings at surgery with histological confirmation or response to chemotherapy. For statistical analysis, the 19 sites were grouped into four anatomical regions: pelvis, middle abdomen, upper abdomen and lymph nodes. The videoclips were assessed by raters comprising both senior gynecologists (mainly self-trained expert ultrasound examiners who perform preoperative ultrasound assessment of ovarian cancer spread almost daily) and gynecologists who had undergone a minimum of 6 months' supervised training in the preoperative ultrasound assessment of ovarian cancer spread in a gynecological oncology center. The raters were classified as highly experienced or less experienced based on annual individual caseload and the number of years that they had been performing ultrasound evaluation of ovarian cancer spread. Raters were aware that for each site there would be 10 videoclips with and 10 without cancer infiltration. Each rater independently classified every videoclip as showing or not showing cancer infiltration and rated the image quality (on a scale from 0 to 10) and their diagnostic confidence (on a scale from 0 to 10). A generalized linear mixed model with random effects was used to estimate which factors (including level of experience, image quality, diagnostic confidence and anatomical region) affected the likelihood of a correct classification of cancer infiltration. We assessed the observed percentage of videoclips classified correctly, the expected percentage of videoclips classified correctly based on the generalized linear mixed model and inter-rater agreement (reliability) in classifying anatomical sites as being infiltrated by cancer. RESULTS: Twenty-five raters participated in the study, of whom 13 were highly experienced and 12 were less experienced. The observed percentage of correct classification of cancer infiltration ranged from 70% to 100% depending on rater and anatomical site, and the median percentage of correct classification for the 25 raters ranged from 90% to 100%. The probability of correct classification of all 380 videoclips ranged from 0.956 to 0.975 and was not affected by the rater's level of ultrasound experience. The likelihood of correct classification increased with increased image quality and diagnostic confidence and was affected by anatomical region. It was highest for sites in the pelvis, second highest for those in the middle abdomen, third highest for lymph nodes and lowest for sites in the upper abdomen. The inter-rater agreement of all 25 raters regarding the presence of cancer infiltration ranged from substantial (Fleiss kappa, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.66-0.71)) to very good (Fleiss kappa, 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97-1.00)) depending on the anatomical site. It was lowest for sites in the upper abdomen (Fleiss kappa, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.66-0.71) to 0.97 (95% CI, 0.94-0.99)) and highest for sites in the pelvis (Fleiss kappa, 0.94 (95% CI, 0.92-0.97) to 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97-1.00)). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound examiners with different levels of ultrasound experience can classify correctly predefined anatomical sites as being infiltrated or not infiltrated by ovarian cancer based on video recordings obtained by an experienced ultrasound examiner, and the inter-rater agreement is substantial. The likelihood of correct classification as well as the inter-rater agreement is highest for sites in the pelvis and lowest for sites in the upper abdomen. However, owing to the study design, our results regarding diagnostic accuracy and inter-rater agreement are likely to be overoptimistic. © 2025 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc25015853
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20250731091259.0
007      
ta
008      
250708s2025 enk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1002/uog.29208 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)40247746
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a enk
100    1_
$a Fischerova, D $u Gynecologic Oncology Centre, Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000272243218 $7 xx0074804
245    10
$a Ultrasound examiners' ability to describe ovarian cancer spread using preacquired ultrasound videoclips from a selected patient sample with high prevalence of cancer spread / $c D. Fischerova, P. Pinto, M. Pesta, M. Blasko, MC. Moruzzi, AC. Testa, D. Franchi, V. Chiappa, JL. Alcázar, M. Wiesnerova, D. Cibula, L. Valentin, collaborators
520    9_
$a OBJECTIVES: To assess the ability, as well as factors affecting the ability, of ultrasound examiners with different levels of ultrasound experience to detect correctly infiltration of ovarian cancer in predefined anatomical locations, and to evaluate the inter-rater agreement regarding the presence or absence of cancer infiltration, using preacquired ultrasound videoclips obtained in a selected patient sample with a high prevalence of cancer spread. METHODS: This study forms part of the Imaging Study in Advanced ovArian Cancer multicenter observational study (NCT03808792). Ultrasound videoclips showing assessment of infiltration of ovarian cancer were obtained by the principal investigator (an ultrasound expert, who did not participate in rating) at 19 predefined anatomical sites in the abdomen and pelvis, including five sites that, if infiltrated, would indicate tumor non-resectability. For each site, there were 10 videoclips showing cancer infiltration and 10 showing no cancer infiltration. The reference standard was either findings at surgery with histological confirmation or response to chemotherapy. For statistical analysis, the 19 sites were grouped into four anatomical regions: pelvis, middle abdomen, upper abdomen and lymph nodes. The videoclips were assessed by raters comprising both senior gynecologists (mainly self-trained expert ultrasound examiners who perform preoperative ultrasound assessment of ovarian cancer spread almost daily) and gynecologists who had undergone a minimum of 6 months' supervised training in the preoperative ultrasound assessment of ovarian cancer spread in a gynecological oncology center. The raters were classified as highly experienced or less experienced based on annual individual caseload and the number of years that they had been performing ultrasound evaluation of ovarian cancer spread. Raters were aware that for each site there would be 10 videoclips with and 10 without cancer infiltration. Each rater independently classified every videoclip as showing or not showing cancer infiltration and rated the image quality (on a scale from 0 to 10) and their diagnostic confidence (on a scale from 0 to 10). A generalized linear mixed model with random effects was used to estimate which factors (including level of experience, image quality, diagnostic confidence and anatomical region) affected the likelihood of a correct classification of cancer infiltration. We assessed the observed percentage of videoclips classified correctly, the expected percentage of videoclips classified correctly based on the generalized linear mixed model and inter-rater agreement (reliability) in classifying anatomical sites as being infiltrated by cancer. RESULTS: Twenty-five raters participated in the study, of whom 13 were highly experienced and 12 were less experienced. The observed percentage of correct classification of cancer infiltration ranged from 70% to 100% depending on rater and anatomical site, and the median percentage of correct classification for the 25 raters ranged from 90% to 100%. The probability of correct classification of all 380 videoclips ranged from 0.956 to 0.975 and was not affected by the rater's level of ultrasound experience. The likelihood of correct classification increased with increased image quality and diagnostic confidence and was affected by anatomical region. It was highest for sites in the pelvis, second highest for those in the middle abdomen, third highest for lymph nodes and lowest for sites in the upper abdomen. The inter-rater agreement of all 25 raters regarding the presence of cancer infiltration ranged from substantial (Fleiss kappa, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.66-0.71)) to very good (Fleiss kappa, 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97-1.00)) depending on the anatomical site. It was lowest for sites in the upper abdomen (Fleiss kappa, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.66-0.71) to 0.97 (95% CI, 0.94-0.99)) and highest for sites in the pelvis (Fleiss kappa, 0.94 (95% CI, 0.92-0.97) to 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97-1.00)). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound examiners with different levels of ultrasound experience can classify correctly predefined anatomical sites as being infiltrated or not infiltrated by ovarian cancer based on video recordings obtained by an experienced ultrasound examiner, and the inter-rater agreement is substantial. The likelihood of correct classification as well as the inter-rater agreement is highest for sites in the pelvis and lowest for sites in the upper abdomen. However, owing to the study design, our results regarding diagnostic accuracy and inter-rater agreement are likely to be overoptimistic. © 2025 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    12
$a nádory vaječníků $x diagnostické zobrazování $x patologie $7 D010051
650    _2
$a ultrasonografie $x metody $7 D014463
650    _2
$a odchylka pozorovatele $7 D015588
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a audiovizuální záznam $7 D014741
650    _2
$a břicho $x diagnostické zobrazování $x patologie $7 D000005
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    12
$a klinické kompetence $7 D002983
650    _2
$a invazivní růst nádoru $x diagnostické zobrazování $7 D009361
650    _2
$a pánev $x diagnostické zobrazování $x patologie $7 D010388
650    _2
$a prevalence $7 D015995
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a multicentrická studie $7 D016448
655    _2
$a pozorovací studie $7 D064888
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Pinto, P $u Department of Gynecology, Portuguese Institute of Oncology Francisco Gentil, Lisbon, Portugal $u First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000264598529
700    1_
$a Pesta, M $u Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000153110797 $7 xx0143725
700    1_
$a Blasko, M $u Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/000000029459019X
700    1_
$a Moruzzi, M C $u Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Department of Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
700    1_
$a Testa, A C $u Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Department of Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy $u Section of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy $1 https://orcid.org/0000000322178726
700    1_
$a Franchi, D $u Preventive Gynecology Unit, Division of Gynecology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy $1 https://orcid.org/0000000239505538
700    1_
$a Chiappa, V $u Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy $1 https://orcid.org/000000021811209X
700    1_
$a Alcázar, J L $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain $u QuironSalud Hospital, Málaga, Spain $1 https://orcid.org/0000000297000853 $7 xx0253564
700    1_
$a Wiesnerova, M $u Masaryk University Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Brno, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Cibula, D $u Gynecologic Oncology Centre, Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000163879356 $7 jo20000074072
700    1_
$a Valentin, L $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden $u Department of Clinical Sciences Malmö, Lund University, Lund, Sweden $1 https://orcid.org/0000000238306414
710    2_
$a collaborators
773    0_
$w MED00010717 $t Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology $x 1469-0705 $g Roč. 65, č. 5 (2025), s. 641-652
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40247746 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20250708 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20250731091253 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2366585 $s 1252978
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2025 $b 65 $c 5 $d 641-652 $e 20250418 $i 1469-0705 $m Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology $n Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol $x MED00010717
GRA    __
$a NV19-03-00552 $p Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic (Czech Health Research Council)
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20250708

Find record

Citation metrics

Archiving options