Comparison of Volumetric Quantitative PET Parameters Before and After a CT-Based Elastic Deformation on Dual-Time 18FDG-PET/CT Images: A Feasibility Study in a Perspective of Radiotherapy Planning in Head and Neck Cancer

BACKGROUND: The use of 18FDG-PET/CT for delineating a gross tumor volume (GTV, also called MTV metabolic tumor volume) in radiotherapy (RT) planning of head neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC) is not included in current recommendations, although its interest for the radiotherapist is of evidence. Because pre-RT PET scans are rarely done simultaneously with dosimetry CT, the validation of a robust image registration tool and of a reproducible MTV delineation method is still required. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to study a CT-based elastic registration method on dual-time pre-RT 18FDG-PET/CT images to assess the feasibility of PET-based RT planning in patients with HNSCC. METHODS: Dual-time 18FDG-PET/CT [whole-body examination (wbPET) + 1 dedicated step (headPET)] were selected to simulate a 2-times scenario of pre-RT PET images deformation on dosimetry CT. ER-headPET and RR-headPET images were, respectively, reconstructed after CT-to-CT rigid (RR) and elastic (ER) registrations of the headPET on the wbPET. The MTVs delineation was performed using two methods (40%SUVmax, PET-Edge). The percentage variations of several PET parameters (SUVmax, SUVmean, SUVpeak, MTV, TLG) were calculated between wbPET, ER-headPET, and RR-headPET. Correlation between MTV values was calculated (Deming linear regression). MTVs intersections were assessed by two indices (OF, DICE) and compared together (Wilcoxon test). Additional per-volume analysis was evaluated (Mann-Whitney test). Inter- and intra-observer reproducibilities were evaluated (ICC = intra-class coefficient). RESULTS: 36 patients (30M/6F; median age = 65 y) were retrospectively included. The changes in SUVmax, SUVmean and SUVpeak values between ER-headPET and RR-headPET images were <5%. The variations in MTV values between ER-headPET and wbPET images were −6 and −3% with 40%SUVmax and PET Edge, respectively. Their correlations were excellent whatever the delineation method (R(2) > 0.99). The ER-headPET MTVs had significant higher mean OF and DICE with the wbPET MTVs, for both delineation methods (p ≤ 0.002); and also when lesions had a volume > 5cc (excellent OF = 0.80 with 40%SUVmax). The inter- and intra-observer reproducibilities for MTV delineation were excellent (ICC ≥ 0.8, close to 1 with PET-Edge). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated no significant changes in MTV after an elastic deformation of pre-RT 18FDG-PET/CT images acquired in dual-time mode. This opens possibilities for HNSCC radiotherapy planning improvement by transferring GTV-PET on dosimetry CT.