Article Sidebar
Article Details
The author(s) retain copyright on work published by AOSIS unless specified otherwise.
Licensing and publishing rights
Author(s) of work published by AOSIS are required to grant AOSIS the unlimited rights to publish the definitive work in any format, language and medium, for any lawful purpose. AOSIS requires journal authors to publish their work in open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.
Read more here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
The authors retain the non-exclusive right to do anything they wish with the published article(s), provided attribution is given to the applicable journal with details of the original publication, as set out in the official citation of the article published in the journal. The retained right specifically includes the right to post the article on the authors’ or their institution’s websites or in institutional repositories.
Previously published work may have been published under a different licence. We advise the community that if they would like to reuse the work to consult the applicable licence at article level.
Main Article Content
Inter-observer variability influences the Lugano classification when restaging lymphoma
Abstract
Background: Lymphoma is an important and potentially curable oncological disease in South Africa. The staging and restaging of lymphoma have evolved over the years, with the latest international consensus guideline being the Lugano classification (LC). Prior to routine implementation of the LC, its robustness in the local setting should be determined.
Objectives: To determine the Inter-observer variability in response assignment when applying the LC in patients with lymphoma who were staged and restaged with computed tomography. In case of excessive discordance, specific mitigating measures will have to be taken before and during any proposed implementation of the LC.
Method: A total of 61 computed tomography scans in 21 patients were evaluated independently by four reviewers according to the LC, of which 21 scans were done at baseline, 21 at initial restaging and 19 at follow-up restaging. A retrospective comparative analysis was performed. Kappa values were calculated to determine agreement between observers.
Results: Only a moderate inter-observer agreement of 52% in the overall response classification was demonstrated. The most important sources of discrepancy were inconsistency in the assessment of target lesion regression to normal, determining the percentage change in the summed cross-sectional area of the target lesions and ascribing new lesions as either due to lymphoma or other causes.
Conclusion: Implementing the Lugano classification when restaging lymphoma is desirable to improve consistency and to conform to international guidelines. However, our study shows substantial inter-observer variability in response classification, potentially altering the treatment plan. Dedicated training and continuous quality control should, therefore, accompany the process.
