Cargando…

Efficacy of FDG-PET for defining gross tumor volume of head and neck cancer

We analyzed the data for 53 patients with histologically proven primary squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck treated with radiotherapy between February 2006 and August 2009. All patients underwent contrast-enhanced (CE)-CT and (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET before radiation therapy plann...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kajitani, Chikae, Asakawa, Isao, Uto, Fumiaki, Katayama, Emiko, Inoue, Kazuya, Tamamoto, Tetsuro, Shirone, Norihisa, Okamoto, Hideyuki, Kirita, Tadaaki, Hasegawa, Masatoshi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3709660/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23287772
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jrr/rrs131
_version_ 1782276776674721792
author Kajitani, Chikae
Asakawa, Isao
Uto, Fumiaki
Katayama, Emiko
Inoue, Kazuya
Tamamoto, Tetsuro
Shirone, Norihisa
Okamoto, Hideyuki
Kirita, Tadaaki
Hasegawa, Masatoshi
author_facet Kajitani, Chikae
Asakawa, Isao
Uto, Fumiaki
Katayama, Emiko
Inoue, Kazuya
Tamamoto, Tetsuro
Shirone, Norihisa
Okamoto, Hideyuki
Kirita, Tadaaki
Hasegawa, Masatoshi
author_sort Kajitani, Chikae
collection PubMed
description We analyzed the data for 53 patients with histologically proven primary squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck treated with radiotherapy between February 2006 and August 2009. All patients underwent contrast-enhanced (CE)-CT and (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET before radiation therapy planning (RTP) to define the gross tumor volume (GTV). The PET-based GTV (PET-GTV) for RTP was defined using both CE-CT images and FDG-PET images. The CE-CT tumor volume corresponding to a FDG-PET image was regarded as the PET-GTV. The CE-CT-based GTV (CT-GTV) for RTP was defined using CE-CT images alone. Additionally, CT-GTV delineation and PET-GTV delineation were performed by four radiation oncologists independently in 19 cases. All four oncologists did both methods. Of these, PET-GTV delineation was successfully performed in all 19 cases, but CT-GTV delineation was not performed in 4 cases. In the other 15 cases, the mean CT-GTV was larger than the PET-GTV in 10 cases, and the standard deviation of the CT-GTV was larger than that of the PET-GTV in 10 cases. Sensitivity of PET-GTV for identifying the primary tumor was 96%, but that of CT-GTV was 81% (P < 0.01). In patients with oropharyngeal cancer and tongue cancer, the sensitivity of CT-GTV was 63% and 71%, respectively. When both the primary lesions and the lymph nodes were evaluated for RTP, PET-GTV differed from CT-GTV in 19 cases (36%). These results suggested that FDG-PET is effective for defining GTV in RTP for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, and PET-GTV evaluated by both CE-CT and FDG-PET images is preferable to CT-GTV by CE-CT alone.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3709660
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37096602013-07-15 Efficacy of FDG-PET for defining gross tumor volume of head and neck cancer Kajitani, Chikae Asakawa, Isao Uto, Fumiaki Katayama, Emiko Inoue, Kazuya Tamamoto, Tetsuro Shirone, Norihisa Okamoto, Hideyuki Kirita, Tadaaki Hasegawa, Masatoshi J Radiat Res Oncology We analyzed the data for 53 patients with histologically proven primary squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck treated with radiotherapy between February 2006 and August 2009. All patients underwent contrast-enhanced (CE)-CT and (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET before radiation therapy planning (RTP) to define the gross tumor volume (GTV). The PET-based GTV (PET-GTV) for RTP was defined using both CE-CT images and FDG-PET images. The CE-CT tumor volume corresponding to a FDG-PET image was regarded as the PET-GTV. The CE-CT-based GTV (CT-GTV) for RTP was defined using CE-CT images alone. Additionally, CT-GTV delineation and PET-GTV delineation were performed by four radiation oncologists independently in 19 cases. All four oncologists did both methods. Of these, PET-GTV delineation was successfully performed in all 19 cases, but CT-GTV delineation was not performed in 4 cases. In the other 15 cases, the mean CT-GTV was larger than the PET-GTV in 10 cases, and the standard deviation of the CT-GTV was larger than that of the PET-GTV in 10 cases. Sensitivity of PET-GTV for identifying the primary tumor was 96%, but that of CT-GTV was 81% (P < 0.01). In patients with oropharyngeal cancer and tongue cancer, the sensitivity of CT-GTV was 63% and 71%, respectively. When both the primary lesions and the lymph nodes were evaluated for RTP, PET-GTV differed from CT-GTV in 19 cases (36%). These results suggested that FDG-PET is effective for defining GTV in RTP for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, and PET-GTV evaluated by both CE-CT and FDG-PET images is preferable to CT-GTV by CE-CT alone. Oxford University Press 2013-07 2013-01-03 /pmc/articles/PMC3709660/ /pubmed/23287772 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jrr/rrs131 Text en © The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Japan Radiation Research Society and Japanese Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Oncology
Kajitani, Chikae
Asakawa, Isao
Uto, Fumiaki
Katayama, Emiko
Inoue, Kazuya
Tamamoto, Tetsuro
Shirone, Norihisa
Okamoto, Hideyuki
Kirita, Tadaaki
Hasegawa, Masatoshi
Efficacy of FDG-PET for defining gross tumor volume of head and neck cancer
title Efficacy of FDG-PET for defining gross tumor volume of head and neck cancer
title_full Efficacy of FDG-PET for defining gross tumor volume of head and neck cancer
title_fullStr Efficacy of FDG-PET for defining gross tumor volume of head and neck cancer
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of FDG-PET for defining gross tumor volume of head and neck cancer
title_short Efficacy of FDG-PET for defining gross tumor volume of head and neck cancer
title_sort efficacy of fdg-pet for defining gross tumor volume of head and neck cancer
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3709660/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23287772
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jrr/rrs131
work_keys_str_mv AT kajitanichikae efficacyoffdgpetfordefininggrosstumorvolumeofheadandneckcancer
AT asakawaisao efficacyoffdgpetfordefininggrosstumorvolumeofheadandneckcancer
AT utofumiaki efficacyoffdgpetfordefininggrosstumorvolumeofheadandneckcancer
AT katayamaemiko efficacyoffdgpetfordefininggrosstumorvolumeofheadandneckcancer
AT inouekazuya efficacyoffdgpetfordefininggrosstumorvolumeofheadandneckcancer
AT tamamototetsuro efficacyoffdgpetfordefininggrosstumorvolumeofheadandneckcancer
AT shironenorihisa efficacyoffdgpetfordefininggrosstumorvolumeofheadandneckcancer
AT okamotohideyuki efficacyoffdgpetfordefininggrosstumorvolumeofheadandneckcancer
AT kiritatadaaki efficacyoffdgpetfordefininggrosstumorvolumeofheadandneckcancer
AT hasegawamasatoshi efficacyoffdgpetfordefininggrosstumorvolumeofheadandneckcancer