16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact of hybrid FDG-PET/CT on gross tumor volume definition of cervical esophageal cancer: reducing interobserver variation

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Intensity-modulated radiation therapy is being increasingly used to treat cervical esophageal cancer (CEC); however, delineating the gross tumor volume (GTV) accurately is essential for its successful treatment. The use of computed tomography (CT) images to determine the GTV produces a large degree of interobserver variation. In this study, we evaluated whether the use of [ 18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)/CT fused images reduced interobserver variation, compared with CT images alone, to determine the GTV in patients with CEC. FDG-PET/CT scans were obtained for 10 patients with CEC, imaged positioned on a flat tabletop with a pillow. Five radiation oncologists independently defined the GTV for the primary tumors using routine clinical data; they contoured the GTV based on CT images (GTV CT), followed by contouring based on FDG-PET/CT fused images (GTV PET/CT). To determine the geometric observer variation, we calculated the conformality index (CI) from the ratio of the intersection of the GTVs to their union. The interobserver CI was compared using Wilcoxon’s signed rank test. The mean (±SD) interobserver CIs of GTV CT and GTV PET/CT were 0.39 ± 0.15 and 0.58 ± 0.10, respectively ( P = 0.005). Our results suggested that FDG-PET/CT images reduced interobserver variation when determining the GTV in patients with CEC. FDG-PET/CT may increase the consistency of the radiographically determined GTV in patients with CEC.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Dosimetric comparison of IMRT vs. 3D conformal radiotherapy in the treatment of cancer of the cervical esophagus.

          Radiotherapy planning for cervical esophageal cancer is challenging. We compared IMRT and 3D conformal radiotherapy (CRT) with respect to conformality of target coverage and normal tissue sparing. We selected five patients with cervical esophagus cancer, who represented the heterogeneity of clinical cases, treated to radical dose and planned with Pinnacle v6.2. Target doses for CRT plans were 50, 60, and 70Gy (single-phase IMRT 56, 63, and 70). We compared PTV coverage by the 95% isodose (PTV(95)), conformality ratio (CR), conformation number (CN), and maximum or mean doses (D(max), D(mean)) to normal structures. Median PTV(95) for IMRT plans for PTV70, PTV63, and PTV56 were 97%, 99%, and 98% (CRT 91%, 98%, and 85%). IMRT plans demonstrated lower D(max) to the spinal cord and brainstem (42 and 36Gy) compared to CRT (46 and 39Gy). Median left parotid D(mean) was 35Gy (IMRT) vs. 53Gy (CRT). Median right parotid D(mean) was 35Gy (IMRT) vs. 36Gy (CRT). The median CR50/56Gy was 1.4 (CRT) vs. 1.2 (IMRT), CR70Gy 1.7 (CRT) vs. 1.1 (IMRT). CN50/56 and CN70 values were 0.80 and 0.85 (IMRT) vs. 0.56 and 0.5 (CRT). IMRT provides superior target volume coverage and conformality, with decreased dose to normal structures.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Cervical esophageal cancer: a gap in cancer knowledge.

            The aim of this systematic review is to provide an overview of the diagnosis, treatment options and treatment-related complications of cervical esophageal carcinoma (CEC) and to subsequently provide recommendations to improve quality of care.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Impact of hybrid fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography on radiotherapy planning in esophageal and non-small-cell lung cancer.

              The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of a hybrid fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) scanner in radiotherapy planning for esophageal and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A total of 30 patients (16 with esophageal cancer, 14 with NSCLC) underwent an FDG-PET/CT for radiotherapy planning purposes. Noncontrast total-body spiral CT scans were obtained first, followed immediately by FDG-PET imaging which was automatically co-registered to the CT scan. A physician not involved in the patients' original treatment planning designed a gross tumor volume (GTV) based first on the CT dataset alone, while blinded to the FDG-PET dataset. Afterward, the physician designed a GTV based on the fused PET/CT dataset. To standardize PET GTV margin definition, background liver PET activity was standardized in all images. The CT-based and PET/CT-based GTVs were then quantitatively compared by way of an index of conformality, which is the ratio of the intersection of the two GTVs to their union. The mean index of conformality was 0.44 (range, 0.00-0.70) for patients with NSCLC and 0.46 (range, 0.13-0.80) for patients with esophageal cancer. In 10 of the 16 (62.5%) esophageal cancer patients, and in 12 of the 14 (85.7%) NSCLC patients, the addition of the FDG-PET data led to the definition of a smaller GTV. The incorporation of a hybrid FDG-PET/CT scanner had an impact on the radiotherapy planning of esophageal cancer and NSCLC. In future studies, we recommend adoption of a conformality index for a more comprehensive comparison of newer treatment planning imaging modalities to conventional options.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Radiat Res
                J. Radiat. Res
                jrr
                Journal of Radiation Research
                Oxford University Press
                0449-3060
                1349-9157
                May 2019
                13 March 2019
                13 March 2019
                : 60
                : 3
                : 348-352
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan
                [2 ]Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan
                [3 ]Department of Radiological Technology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
                [4 ]Department of Medical Imaging, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan
                Author notes
                Corresponding author. Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, 1-1-1 Honjo, Chuo-ku, Kumamoto 860-8556, Japan. Tel/Fax: +81 96-373-5522; Email: ryo108@ 123456kumamoto-u.ac.jp
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9764-5718
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3124-0819
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0852-7515
                Article
                rrz004
                10.1093/jrr/rrz004
                6530614
                30864652
                e78a6230-7133-40ea-a0a5-11ca611f60fc
                © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Japan Radiation Research Society and Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 28 November 2018
                : 14 January 2019
                Page count
                Pages: 5
                Categories
                Regular Paper
                Oncology

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                positron emission tomography,radiation therapy,esophageal cancer,gross tumor volume,radiotherapy planning,intensity-modulated radiation therapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article