Comparison of standardized uptake value-based positron emission tomography and computed tomography target volumes in esophageal cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy

International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

Volumn 78, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 1057-1063

  Vali, Faisal S ^a   Nagda, Suneel ^a   Hall, William ^a   Sinacore, James ^a   Gao, Mingcheng ^a   Lee, Steven H ^b   Hong, Robert ^c   Shoup, Margaret ^a   Emami, Bahman ^a  

^a LOYOLA UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c VIRGINIA HOSPITAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Esophageal cancer; Positron emission tomography; Radiotherapy planning; Standardized uptake value; Target volume

Indexed keywords

ESOPHAGEAL CANCER; POSITRON EMISSION; RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING; STANDARDIZED UPTAKE VALUES; TARGET VOLUME;

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; ELECTRONS; LIVER; POSITRONS; RADIOTHERAPY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TUMORS;

POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY;

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; ESOPHAGUS CANCER; HUMAN; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TUMOR VOLUME; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOTHERAPY; DIAGNOSTIC USE; ECHOGRAPHY; ENDOSCOPIC ECHOGRAPHY; ESOPHAGEAL NEOPLASMS; EVALUATION STUDY; LIVER; METABOLISM; PROCEDURES; RADIOGRAPHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCINTISCANNING;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ESOPHAGEAL NEOPLASMS; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; LIVER; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TUMOR BURDEN; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL;

EID: 77958495819     PISSN: 03603016     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.09.022     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. A. Jemal, R. Siegel, and E. Ward Cancer statistics, 2008 CA Cancer J Clin 58 2008 71 96
2. National Comprehensive Cancer Network NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology, esophageal cancer (v.1.2009) 2009 NCCN Fort Washington, PA p. 48
3. J. Bradley, and S. Mutic Carcinoma of the esophagus, target volume definition L.W. Brady, Technical basis of radiation therapy: Practical clinical applications 2008 Springer New York 518
4. B. Czito, A. Denittis, and C. Willett Esophageal cancer, radiation therapy techniques E.C. Halperin, Perez and Brady's principles and practice of radiation oncology 5th ed 2007 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Philadelphia p. 1139
5. H. Kato, H. Kuwano, and M. Nakajima Comparison between positron emission tomography and computed tomography in the use of the assessment of esophageal carcinoma Cancer 94 2002 921 928
6. R. Komaki, Z. Liao, and K. Forster Target definition and contouring in carcinoma of the lung and esophagus Rays 28 2003 225 236
7. R. Gore, and V. Yaghmai Esophageal cancer, comparison of imaging modalities D. Bragg, P. Rubin, H. Hricak, Oncologic Imaging 2nd ed 2002 Saunders Philadelphia 379
8. T. Leong, C. Everitt, and K. Yuen A prospective study to evaluate the impact of FDG-PET on CT-based radiotherapy treatment planning for oesophageal cancer Radiother Oncol 78 2006 254 261
9. V. Gregoire Is there any future in radiotherapy planning without the use of PET: Unraveling the myth Radiother Oncol 73 2004 261 263
10. O. Vrieze, K. Haustermans, and W. De Wever Is there a role for FGD-PET in radiotherapy planning in esophageal carcinoma? Radiother Oncol 73 2004 269 275
11. V. Gondi, K. Bradley, and M. Mehta Impact of hybrid fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography on radiotherapy planning in esophageal and non-small-cell lung cancer Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 67 2007 187 195
12. I.S. Grills, D. Yan, and Q.C. Black Clinical implications of defining the gross tumor volume with combination of CT and 18FDG-positron emission tomography in non-small-cell lung cancer Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 67 2007 709 719
13. R. Hong, J. Halama, and D. Bova Correlation of PET standard uptake value and CT window-level thresholds for target delineation in CT-based radiation treatment planning Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 67 2007 720 726
14. L. Moureau-Zabotto, E. Touboul, and D. Lerouge Impact of CT and 18F-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography image fusion for conformal radiotherapy in esophageal carcinoma Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 63 2005 340 345
15. A.C. Paulino, and P.A. Johnstone FDG-PET in radiotherapy treatment planning: Pandora's box? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 59 2004 4 5
16. X.K. Zheng, L.H. Chen, and Q.S. Wang Influence of FDG-PET on computed tomography-based radiotherapy planning for locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 69 2007 1381 1388
17. M. MacManus, R. Hicks, and M. Bayne In regard to Paulino and Johnstone: Use of PET and CT imaging data in radiation therapy planning (Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;59:4-5) Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 60 2004 1005 1006 author reply 1006
18. U. Nestle, S. Kremp, and A. Schaefer-Schuler Comparison of different methods for delineation of 18F-FDG PET-positive tissue for target volume definition in radiotherapy of patients with non-small cell lung cancer J Nucl Med 46 2005 1342 1348
19. M. Mamede, G. El Fakhri, and P. Abreu-e-Lima Pre-operative estimation of esophageal tumor metabolic length in FDG-PET images with surgical pathology confirmation Ann Nucl Med 21 2007 553 562
20. M. Mamede, P. Abreu-E-Lima, and M.R. Oliva FDG-PET/CT tumor segmentation-derived indices of metabolic activity to assess response to neoadjuvant therapy and progression-free survival in esophageal cancer: Correlation with histopathology results Am J Clin Oncol 30 2007 377 388
21. X. Zhong, J. Yu, and B. Zhang Using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to estimate the length of gross tumor in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 73 2009 136 141
22. J. Bradley, W.L. Thorstad, and S. Mutic Impact of FDG-PET on radiation therapy volume delineation in non-small-cell lung cancer Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 59 2004 78 86