Sharma Kanishka, Caroli Anna, Quach Le Van, Petzold Katja, Bozzetto Michela, Serra Andreas L, Remuzzi Giuseppe, Remuzzi Andrea
Bioengineering Department, IRCCS Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, Bergamo, Italy.
Zurich Center for Integrative Human Physiology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
PLoS One. 2017 May 30;12(5):e0178488. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178488. eCollection 2017.
In autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), total kidney volume (TKV) is regarded as an important biomarker of disease progression and different methods are available to assess kidney volume. The purpose of this study was to identify the most efficient kidney volume computation method to be used in clinical studies evaluating the effectiveness of treatments on ADPKD progression.
We measured single kidney volume (SKV) on two series of MR and CT images from clinical studies on ADPKD (experimental dataset) by two independent operators (expert and beginner), twice, using all of the available methods: polyline manual tracing (reference method), free-hand manual tracing, semi-automatic tracing, Stereology, Mid-slice and Ellipsoid method. Additionally, the expert operator also measured the kidney length. We compared different methods for reproducibility, accuracy, precision, and time required. In addition, we performed a validation study to evaluate the sensitivity of these methods to detect the between-treatment group difference in TKV change over one year, using MR images from a previous clinical study. Reproducibility was higher on CT than MR for all methods, being highest for manual and semiautomatic contouring methods (planimetry). On MR, planimetry showed highest accuracy and precision, while on CT accuracy and precision of both planimetry and Stereology methods were comparable. Mid-slice and Ellipsoid method, as well as kidney length were fast but provided only a rough estimate of kidney volume. The results of the validation study indicated that planimetry and Stereology allow using an importantly lower number of patients to detect changes in kidney volume induced by drug treatment as compared to other methods.
Planimetry should be preferred over fast and simplified methods for accurately monitoring ADPKD progression and assessing drug treatment effects. Expert operators, especially on MR images, are required for performing reliable estimation of kidney volume. The use of efficient TKV quantification methods considerably reduces the number of patients to enrol in clinical investigations, making them more feasible and significant.
在常染色体显性遗传性多囊肾病(ADPKD)中,总肾体积(TKV)被视为疾病进展的重要生物标志物,且有多种方法可用于评估肾体积。本研究的目的是确定在评估治疗对ADPKD进展有效性的临床研究中最有效的肾体积计算方法。
我们由两名独立操作人员(专家和新手),使用所有可用方法:折线手动追踪(参考方法)、徒手手动追踪、半自动追踪、体视学方法、中间层面法和椭球体法,对来自ADPKD临床研究的两组MR和CT图像(实验数据集)上的单个肾体积(SKV)进行了两次测量。此外,专家操作人员还测量了肾长度。我们比较了不同方法在可重复性、准确性、精密度和所需时间方面的差异。另外,我们利用一项既往临床研究的MR图像进行了一项验证研究,以评估这些方法检测治疗组间TKV在一年中变化差异的敏感性。所有方法在CT上的可重复性均高于MR,手动和半自动轮廓描绘法(面积测量法)的可重复性最高。在MR上,面积测量法显示出最高的准确性和精密度,而在CT上,面积测量法和体视学方法的准确性和精密度相当。中间层面法和椭球体法以及肾长度测量速度快,但仅提供肾体积的粗略估计。验证研究结果表明与其他方法相比,面积测量法和体视学方法能够使用数量显著更少的患者来检测药物治疗引起的肾体积变化。
为准确监测ADPKD进展和评估药物治疗效果,应优先选择面积测量法而非快速且简化的方法。进行可靠的肾体积估计需要专家操作人员,尤其是在处理MR图像时。使用高效的TKV定量方法可大幅减少临床研究中所需纳入的患者数量,使其更具可行性和意义。