Cargando…

FDG PET/CT for rectal carcinoma radiotherapy treatment planning: comparison of functional volume delineation algorithms and clinical challenges

PET/CT imaging could improve delineation of rectal carcinoma gross tumor volume (GTV) and reduce interobserver variability. The objective of this work was to compare various functional volume delineation algorithms. We enrolled 31 consecutive patients with locally advanced rectal carcinoma. The FDG...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Withofs, Nadia, Bernard, Claire, van der Rest, Catherine, Martinive, Philippe, Hatt, Mathieu, Jodogne, Sebastien, Visvikis, Dimitris, Lee, John A., Coucke, Philippe A., Hustinx, Roland
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711099/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25207560
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v15i5.4696
_version_ 1783283007806767104
author Withofs, Nadia
Bernard, Claire
van der Rest, Catherine
Martinive, Philippe
Hatt, Mathieu
Jodogne, Sebastien
Visvikis, Dimitris
Lee, John A.
Coucke, Philippe A.
Hustinx, Roland
author_facet Withofs, Nadia
Bernard, Claire
van der Rest, Catherine
Martinive, Philippe
Hatt, Mathieu
Jodogne, Sebastien
Visvikis, Dimitris
Lee, John A.
Coucke, Philippe A.
Hustinx, Roland
author_sort Withofs, Nadia
collection PubMed
description PET/CT imaging could improve delineation of rectal carcinoma gross tumor volume (GTV) and reduce interobserver variability. The objective of this work was to compare various functional volume delineation algorithms. We enrolled 31 consecutive patients with locally advanced rectal carcinoma. The FDG PET/CT and the high dose CT ([Formula: see text]) were performed in the radiation treatment position. For each patient, the anatomical [Formula: see text] was delineated based on the [Formula: see text] and compared to six different functional/metabolic [Formula: see text] derived from two automatic segmentation approaches (FLAB and a gradient‐based method); a relative threshold (45% of the [Formula: see text]) and an absolute threshold ([Formula: see text]), using two different commercially available software (Philips EBW4 and Segami OASIS). The spatial sizes and shapes of all volumes were compared using the conformity index (CI). All the delineated metabolic tumor volumes (MTVs) were significantly different. The MTVs were as follows [Formula: see text]; [Formula: see text]; the gradient‐based method ([Formula: see text]); [Formula: see text]); [Formula: see text]; [Formula: see text]; [Formula: see text]. CI between these various volumes ranged from 0.40 to 0.90. The mean CI between the different MTVs and the [Formula: see text] was [Formula: see text]. Finally, the DICOM transfer of MTVs led to additional volume variations. In conclusion, we observed large and statistically significant variations in tumor volume delineation according to the segmentation algorithms and the software products. The manipulation of PET/CT images and MTVs, such as the DICOM transfer to the Radiation Oncology Department, induced additional volume variations. PACS number: 87.55.D‐
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5711099
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57110992018-04-02 FDG PET/CT for rectal carcinoma radiotherapy treatment planning: comparison of functional volume delineation algorithms and clinical challenges Withofs, Nadia Bernard, Claire van der Rest, Catherine Martinive, Philippe Hatt, Mathieu Jodogne, Sebastien Visvikis, Dimitris Lee, John A. Coucke, Philippe A. Hustinx, Roland J Appl Clin Med Phys Medical Imaging PET/CT imaging could improve delineation of rectal carcinoma gross tumor volume (GTV) and reduce interobserver variability. The objective of this work was to compare various functional volume delineation algorithms. We enrolled 31 consecutive patients with locally advanced rectal carcinoma. The FDG PET/CT and the high dose CT ([Formula: see text]) were performed in the radiation treatment position. For each patient, the anatomical [Formula: see text] was delineated based on the [Formula: see text] and compared to six different functional/metabolic [Formula: see text] derived from two automatic segmentation approaches (FLAB and a gradient‐based method); a relative threshold (45% of the [Formula: see text]) and an absolute threshold ([Formula: see text]), using two different commercially available software (Philips EBW4 and Segami OASIS). The spatial sizes and shapes of all volumes were compared using the conformity index (CI). All the delineated metabolic tumor volumes (MTVs) were significantly different. The MTVs were as follows [Formula: see text]; [Formula: see text]; the gradient‐based method ([Formula: see text]); [Formula: see text]); [Formula: see text]; [Formula: see text]; [Formula: see text]. CI between these various volumes ranged from 0.40 to 0.90. The mean CI between the different MTVs and the [Formula: see text] was [Formula: see text]. Finally, the DICOM transfer of MTVs led to additional volume variations. In conclusion, we observed large and statistically significant variations in tumor volume delineation according to the segmentation algorithms and the software products. The manipulation of PET/CT images and MTVs, such as the DICOM transfer to the Radiation Oncology Department, induced additional volume variations. PACS number: 87.55.D‐ John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2014-09-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5711099/ /pubmed/25207560 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v15i5.4696 Text en © 2014 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Medical Imaging
Withofs, Nadia
Bernard, Claire
van der Rest, Catherine
Martinive, Philippe
Hatt, Mathieu
Jodogne, Sebastien
Visvikis, Dimitris
Lee, John A.
Coucke, Philippe A.
Hustinx, Roland
FDG PET/CT for rectal carcinoma radiotherapy treatment planning: comparison of functional volume delineation algorithms and clinical challenges
title FDG PET/CT for rectal carcinoma radiotherapy treatment planning: comparison of functional volume delineation algorithms and clinical challenges
title_full FDG PET/CT for rectal carcinoma radiotherapy treatment planning: comparison of functional volume delineation algorithms and clinical challenges
title_fullStr FDG PET/CT for rectal carcinoma radiotherapy treatment planning: comparison of functional volume delineation algorithms and clinical challenges
title_full_unstemmed FDG PET/CT for rectal carcinoma radiotherapy treatment planning: comparison of functional volume delineation algorithms and clinical challenges
title_short FDG PET/CT for rectal carcinoma radiotherapy treatment planning: comparison of functional volume delineation algorithms and clinical challenges
title_sort fdg pet/ct for rectal carcinoma radiotherapy treatment planning: comparison of functional volume delineation algorithms and clinical challenges
topic Medical Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711099/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25207560
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v15i5.4696
work_keys_str_mv AT withofsnadia fdgpetctforrectalcarcinomaradiotherapytreatmentplanningcomparisonoffunctionalvolumedelineationalgorithmsandclinicalchallenges
AT bernardclaire fdgpetctforrectalcarcinomaradiotherapytreatmentplanningcomparisonoffunctionalvolumedelineationalgorithmsandclinicalchallenges
AT vanderrestcatherine fdgpetctforrectalcarcinomaradiotherapytreatmentplanningcomparisonoffunctionalvolumedelineationalgorithmsandclinicalchallenges
AT martinivephilippe fdgpetctforrectalcarcinomaradiotherapytreatmentplanningcomparisonoffunctionalvolumedelineationalgorithmsandclinicalchallenges
AT hattmathieu fdgpetctforrectalcarcinomaradiotherapytreatmentplanningcomparisonoffunctionalvolumedelineationalgorithmsandclinicalchallenges
AT jodognesebastien fdgpetctforrectalcarcinomaradiotherapytreatmentplanningcomparisonoffunctionalvolumedelineationalgorithmsandclinicalchallenges
AT visvikisdimitris fdgpetctforrectalcarcinomaradiotherapytreatmentplanningcomparisonoffunctionalvolumedelineationalgorithmsandclinicalchallenges
AT leejohna fdgpetctforrectalcarcinomaradiotherapytreatmentplanningcomparisonoffunctionalvolumedelineationalgorithmsandclinicalchallenges
AT couckephilippea fdgpetctforrectalcarcinomaradiotherapytreatmentplanningcomparisonoffunctionalvolumedelineationalgorithmsandclinicalchallenges
AT hustinxroland fdgpetctforrectalcarcinomaradiotherapytreatmentplanningcomparisonoffunctionalvolumedelineationalgorithmsandclinicalchallenges