Comparison of one-, two-, and three-dimensional measurements of childhood brain tumors

Abstract

Background: End points for assessing drug activity in brain tumors are determined by measuring the change in tumor size by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) relative to a pretreatment or best-response scan. Traditionally, two-dimensional (2D) tumor measurements have been used, but one-dimensional (1D) measurements have recently been proposed as an alternative. Because software to estimate three-dimensional (3D) tumor volume from digitized MRI images is available, we compared all three methods of tumor measurement for childhood brain tumors and clinical outcome. Methods: Tumor size from 130 MRI scans from 32 patients (32 baseline and 98 follow-up scans, for a total of 130 scans; median, three scans per patient; range, two to 18 scans) was measured by each method. Tumor-response category (partial response, minor response, stable disease, or progressive disease) was determined from the percentage change in tumor size between the baseline or best-response scan and follow-up scans. Time to clinical progression was independently determined by chart review. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Concordances between 1D and 2D, 1D and 3D, and 2D and 3D were 83% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 67% to 99%), 61% (95% CI = 47% to 75%), and 66% (95% CI = 52% to 80%), respectively, on follow-up scans. Concordances for 1D and 3D and for 2D and 3D were statistically significantly lower than the concordance for 1D and 2D (P