Geometrical Analysis of Radiotherapy Target Volume Delineation: A Systematic Review of Reported Comparison Methods

Clinical Oncology

Volumn 22, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 515-525

  Hanna, G G ^a,b   Hounsell, A R ^a,b   O'Sullivan, J M ^a,b  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL GROUP OF HOSPITALS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Geometrical comparison; Gross tumour volume; Planning target volume; Radiotherapy; Target volume definition

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CENTER OF MASS ANALYSIS; CONCORDANCE INDEX; DOSIMETRY; GEOMETRICAL VOLUME COMPARISON; GEOMETRY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MEDLINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; SIMPLE VOLUME MEASUREMENT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TARGET VOLUME DELINEATION; TECHNIQUE; TUMOR DIAGNOSIS; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; TUMOR VOLUME; VOLUME EDGE ANALYSIS;

EID: 77955661537     PISSN: 09366555     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2010.05.006     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Begnozzi L., Benassi M., Bertanelli M., et al. Quality assurance of 3D-CRT: indications and difficulties in their applications. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2009, 70:24-38.
2. van Herk M. Will IGRT live up to its promise?. Acta Oncol 2008, 47:1186-1187.
3. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements Prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy, ICRU report 50 1993, International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, Bethesda, MD.
4. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements Prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy. Supplement to ICRU report 50. ICRU report 62 1999, International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, Bethesda, MD.
5. Steenbakkers R.J.H.M., Duppen J.C., Fitton I., et al. Observer variation in target volume delineation of lung cancer related to radiation oncologist-computer interaction: a 'Big Brother' evaluation. Radiother Oncol 2005, 77:182-190.
6. Tai P., Van Dyk J., Battista J., et al. Improving the consistency in cervical esophageal target volume definition by special training. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002, 53:766-774.
7. van der Put R.W., Raaymakers B.W., Kerkhof E.M., et al. A novel method for comparing 3D target volume delineations in radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol 2008, 53:2149-2159.
8. Faria S.L., Menard S., Devic S., et al. Impact of FDG PET/CT on radiotherapy volume delineation in non-small-cell lung cancer and correlation of imaging stage with pathological findings. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008, 70:1035-1038.
9. Ashamalla H., Rafla S., Parikh K., et al. The contribution of integrated PET/CT to the evolving definition of treatment volumes in radiation treatment planning in lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005, 63:1016-1023.
10. Stroom J., Blaauwgeers H., van Baardwijk A., et al. Feasibility of pathology-correlated lung imaging for accurate target definition of lung tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007, 69:267-275.
11. Klopp A.H., Chang J.Y., Tucker S.L., et al. Intrathoracic patterns of failure for non-small-cell lung cancer with positron-emission tomography/computed tomography-defined target delineation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007, 69:1409-1416.
12. Bosmans G., Buijsen J., Dekker A., et al. An " in silico" clinical trial comparing free breathing, slow and respiration correlated computed tomography in lung cancer patients. Radiother Oncol 2006, 81:73-80.
13. Bowden P., Fisher R., MacManus M., et al. Measurement of lung tumor volumes using three-dimensional computer planning software. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002, 53:566-573.
14. Bradley J., Thorstad W.L., Mutic S., et al. Impact of FDG-PET on radiation therapy volume delineation in non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004, 59:78-86.
15. 18FDG-hybrid PET fusion. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001, 51:923-931.
16. de Ruysscher D., Wanders S., Minken A., et al. Effects of radiotherapy planning with a dedicated combined PET-CT-simulator of patients with non-small cell lung cancer on dose limiting normal tissues and radiation dose-escalation: a planning study. Radiother Oncol 2005, 77:5-10.
17. Djärv E., Nyman J., Baumann P., et al. Dummy run for a phase II study of stereotactic body radiotherapy of T1-T2 N0M0 medical inoperable non-small cell lung cancer. Acta Oncol 2006, 45:973-977.
18. Driver D.M., Drzymala M., Dobbs H.J., et al. Virtual simulation in palliative lung radiotherapy. Clin Oncol 2004, 16:461-466.
19. Fox J.L., Rengan R., O'Meara W., et al. Does registration of PET and planning CT images decrease interobserver and intraobserver variation in delineating tumor volumes for non-small-cell lung cancer?. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005, 62:70-75.
20. Giraud P., Elles S., Helfre S., et al. Conformal radiotherapy for lung cancer: different delineation of the gross tumor volume (GTV) by radiologists and radiation oncologists. Radiother Oncol 2002, 62:27-36.
21. Gondi V., Bradley K., Mehta M., et al. Impact of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography on radiotherapy planning in esophageal and non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007, 67:187-195.
22. 18FDG-positron emission tomography in non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007, 67:709-719.
23. Grills I.S., Fitch D.L., Goldstein N.S., et al. Clinicopathologic analysis of microscopic extension in lung adenocarcinoma; defining clinical target volume for radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007, 69:334-341.
24. Kepka L., Bujko K., Garmol D., et al. Delineation variation of lymph node stations for treatment planning in lung cancer radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2007, 85:450-455.
25. Ketting C.H., Austin-Seymour M., Kalet I., et al. Consistency of three-dimensional planning target volumes across physicians and institutions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997, 37:445-453.
26. Kupelian P.A., Ramsey C., Meeks S.L., et al. Serial megavoltage CT imaging during external beam radiotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer: observations on tumor regression during treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005, 63:1024-1028.
27. Logue J.P., Sharrock C.L., Cowan R.A., et al. Clinical variability of target volume description in conformal radiotherapy planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998, 41:929-931.
28. Messa C., Ceresoli G.L., Rizzo G., et al. Feasibility of [18F] FDG-PET and coregistered CT on clinical target volume definition of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005, 49:259-266.
29. 18F-FDG PET-positive tissue for target volume definition in radiotherapy of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2005, 46:1342-1348.
30. Senan S., van Sörnsen de Koste J., Samson M., et al. Evaluation of a target contouring protocol for 3D conformal radiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer. Radiother Oncol 1999, 53:247-255.
31. Steenbakkers R.J., Duppen J.C., Fitton I., et al. Reduction of observer variation using matched CT-PET for lung cancer delineation: a three-dimensional analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006, 64:435-448.
32. Van de Steene J., Linthout N., de Mey J., et al. Definition of gross tumor volume in lung cancer: inter-observer variability. Radiother Oncol 2002, 62:37-49.
33. van Sornsen de Koste J.R., Lagerwaard F.J., de Boer H.C.J., et al. Are multiple CT scans required for planning curative radiotherapy in lung tumors of the lower lobe?. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003, 55:1394-1399.
34. Van Sörnsen de Koste J.R., Senan S., Underberg R.W.M., et al. Use of CD-ROM-based tool for analysing contouring variations in involved field radiotherapy for stage III NSCLC. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005, 63:334-339.
35. Wurstbauer K., Deutschmann H., Kopp P., Sedlmayer F. Radiotherapy planning for lung cancer: slow CTs allow the drawing of tighter margins. Radiother Oncol 2005, 75:165-170.
36. Aoyama H., Shirato H., Nishioka T., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging system for three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and its impact on gross tumor volume delineation of central nervous system tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001, 50:821-827.
37. Breen S., Pubicover J., De Silva S., et al. Intraobserver and interobserver variability in GTV delineation on FDG-PET-CT images of head and neck cancers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007, 68:763-770.
38. Daisne J.F., Duprez T., Weynand B., et al. Tumour volume in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma: comparison at CT MR imaging, and FDG PET and validation with surgical specimen. Radiology 2004, 233:93-100.
39. El- Bassiouni M., Ciernik I.F., Davis B., et al. [18FDG] PET-CT-based intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment planning of head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007, 69:286-293.
40. Geets X., Daisne J.F., Tomsej M., Duprez T., Lonneux M., Grégoire V. Impact of the type of imaging modality on target volumes delineation and dose distribution in pharyngo-laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma: comparison between pre- and per-treatment studies. Radiother Oncol 2006, 78:291-297.
41. Mukherji S.K., Toledano A.Y., Beldon C., et al. Interobserver reliability of computed tomography-derived primary tumor volume measurement in patients with supraglottic carcinoma. Cancer 2005, 103:2616-2622.
42. Paulino A.C., Koshy M., Howell R., et al. Comparison of CT- and FDG-PET-defined gross tumor volume in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005, 61:1385-1392.
43. Rasch C., Eisbruch A., Remeijer P., et al. Irradiation of paranasal sinus tumors, a delineation and dose comparison study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002, 52:120-127.
44. Scarfone C., Lavely W.C., Cmelak A.J., et al. Prospective feasibility trial of radiotherapy target definition for head and neck cancer using 3-dimensional PET and CT imaging. J Nucl Med 2004, 45:543-552.
45. Schwartz D.L., Ford E.C., Rajendran J., et al. FDG-PET/CT-guided intensity modulated head and neck radiotherapy: a pilot investigation. Head Neck 2005, 27:478-487.
46. Astner S.T., Dobrei-Ciuchendea M., Essler M., et al. Effect of 11C-methionine-positron emission tomography on gross tumor volume delineation in stereotactic radiotherapy of skull base meningiomas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008, 72:1161-1167.
47. Lee I.H., Piert M., Gomez-Hassan D., et al. Association of 11C-methionine PET uptake with site of failure after concurrent temozolomide and radiation for primary glioblastoma multiforme. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009, 73:479-485.
48. Tralins K.S., Douglas J.G., Stelzer K.J., et al. Volumetric analysis of 18F-FDG PET in glioblastoma multiforme: prognostic information and possible role in definition of target volumes in radiation dose escalation. J Nucl Med 2002, 43:1667-1673.
49. Tsien C., Moughan J., Michalski J.M., et al. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trial 98-03. Phase I three-dimensional conformal radiation dose escalation study in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Trial 98-03. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009, 73:699-708.
50. Vees H., Senthamizhchelvan S., Miralbell R., et al. Assessment of various strategies for 18F-FET PET-guided delineation of target volumes in high-grade glioma patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009, 36:182-193.
51. Weber D.C., Zilli T., Buchegger F., et al. [(18)F]Fluoroethyltyrosine-positron emission tomography-guided radiotherapy for high-grade glioma. Radiat Oncol 2008, 24(3):44.
52. Landis D.M., Luo W., Song J., et al. Variability among breast radiation oncologists in delineation of the postsurgical lumpectomy cavity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007, 67:1299-1308.
53. Li X.A., Tai A., Arthur D.W., et al. Variability of target and normal structure delineation for breast cancer radiotherapy: an RTOG multi-institutional and multiobserver study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009, 73:944-951.
54. Struikmans H., Warlam-Rodenhuis C., Stam T., et al. Interobserver variability of clinical target volume delineation of glandular breast tissue and of boost volume in tangential breast irradiation. Radiother Oncol 2005, 76:293-299.
55. van den Berg H.A., Olofsen-van Acht M.J., van Santvoort J.P., et al. Definition and validation of a reference target volume in early stage node-positive cervical carcinoma, based on lymphangiograms and CT-scans. Radiother Oncol 2000, 54:163-170.
56. Wachter-Gerstner N., Wachter S., Reinstadler E., et al. The impact of sectional imaging on dose escalation in endocavitary HDR-brachytherapy of cervical cancer: results of a prospective comparative trial. Radiother Oncol 2003, 68:51-59.
57. Brianzoni E., Rossi G., Ancidei S., et al. Radiotherapy planning: PET/CT scanner performances in the definition of gross tumour volume and clinical target volume. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005, 32:1392-1399.
58. Lee Y.K., Cook G., Flower M.A., et al. Addition of 18F-FDG-PET scans to radiotherapy planning of thoracic lymphoma. Radiother Oncol 2004, 73:277-283.
59. Leong T., Everitt C., Yuen K., et al. A prospective study to evaluate the impact of FDG-PET on CT-based radiotherapy treatment planning for oesophageal cancer. Radiother Oncol 2006, 78:254-261.
60. Vrieze O., Haustermans K., De Wever W., et al. Is there a role for FGD-PET in radiotherapy planning in esophageal carcinoma?. Radiother Oncol 2004, 73:269-275.
61. 18F-flurodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to estimate the length of gross tumor in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009, 73:136-141.
62. Yamazaki H., Nishiyama K., Tanaka E., et al. Dummy run for a phase II multi-institute trial of chemoradiotherapy for unresectable pancreatic cancer: inter-observer variance in contour delineation. Anticancer Res 2007, 27:2965-2971.
63. Chung H.T., Xia P., Chan L.W., et al. Does image-guided radiotherapy improve toxicity profile in whole pelvic-treated high-risk prostate cancer? Comparison between IG-IMRT and IMRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009, 73:53-60.
64. Lawton C.A., Michalski J., El-Naqa I., et al. Variation in the definition of clinical target volumes for pelvic nodalconformal radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009, 74:377-382.
65. Rasch C., Remeijer P., Koper P.C., et al. Comparison of prostate cancer treatment in two institutions: a quality control study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999, 45:1055-1062.
66. Sanguineti G., Castellone P., Foppiano F., et al. Anatomic variations due to radical prostatectomy. Impact on target volume definition and dose-volume parameters of rectum and bladder. Strahlenther Onkol 2004, 180:563-572.
67. Seddon B., Bidmead M., Wilson J., et al. Target volume definition in conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: quality assurance in the MRC RT-01 trial. Radiother Oncol 2000, 56:73-83.
68. Anderson C., Koshy M., Staley C., et al. PET-CT fusion in radiation management of patients with anorectal tumours. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007, 69:155-162.
69. Patel D.A., Chang S.T., Goodman K.A., et al. Impact of integrated PET/CT on variability of target volume delineation in rectal cancer. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2007, 6:31-36.
70. Jaccard P. Étude comparative de la distribution florale dans une portion des Alpes et des Jura. Bull Soc Vaud Sci Nat 1901, 37:547-579.
71. Dice L.R. Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 1945, 26:297-302.
72. Deurloo K.E.I., Steenbakkers R.J.H.M., Zijp L.J., et al. Quantification of shape variation of prostate and seminal vesicles during external beam radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005, 61:228-238.