Literature DB >> 11830310

Conformal radiotherapy for lung cancer: different delineation of the gross tumor volume (GTV) by radiologists and radiation oncologists.

Philippe Giraud1, Sabine Elles, Sylvie Helfre, Yann De Rycke, Vincent Servois, Marie France Carette, Claude Alzieu, Pierre Yves Bondiau, Bernard Dubray, Emmanuel Touboul, Martin Housset, Jean Claude Rosenwald, Jean Marc Cosset.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Delineation of the gross tumor volume (GTV) and organs at risk constitutes one of the most important phases of conformal radiotherapy (CRT) procedures. In the absence of a clear redefinition of the GTV, for a given pathology, complemented by detailed contouring procedures, the GTV are likely to be estimated rather arbitrarily with the risk of tumor underdosage or detriment to the surrounding healthy tissues. The objective of this study was to compare the delineation of the GTV of intrathoracic tumors by radiologists and radiation oncologists with experience in the field in various centers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The computed tomography images of ten patients with nonoperated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) eligible for CRT were reviewed. Nine radiologists and eight radiation oncologists working in five different centers, classified as either 'junior' or 'senior' according to their professional experience, had to delineate the GTV (primary tumor and involved lymph nodes) with predefined visualization parameters. A dedicated software was used to compare the delineated volumes in terms of intersection and union volumes and to calculate the 'concordance index' for each patient and each subgroup of physicians.
RESULTS: Significant differences between physicians and between centers were observed. Compared to radiation oncologists, radiologists tended to delineate smaller volumes and encountered fewer difficulties to delineate 'difficult' cases. Junior physicians, regardless of their specialty, also tended to delineate smaller and more homogeneous volumes than senior physicians, especially for 'difficult' cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Major discordances were observed between the radiation oncologists' and the radiologists' delineations, indicating that this step needs to be improved. A better training of radiation oncologists in thoracic imaging and collaboration between radiation oncologists and radiologists should decrease this variability. New imaging techniques (image fusion, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy, etc.) may also provide a useful contribution to this difficult delineation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11830310     DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8140(01)00444-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  46 in total

1.  Critical discussion of evaluation parameters for inter-observer variability in target definition for radiation therapy.

Authors:  I Fotina; C Lütgendorf-Caucig; M Stock; R Pötter; D Georg
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2012-01-27       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 2.  PET-guided delineation of radiation therapy treatment volumes: a survey of image segmentation techniques.

Authors:  Habib Zaidi; Issam El Naqa
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-03-25       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Interobserver variability in target volume delineation in postoperative radiochemotherapy for gastric cancer. A pilot prospective study.

Authors:  Cristina Moretones; David León; Arturo Navarro; Olalla Santacruz; Ana María Boladeras; Miquel Macià; María Cambray; Valentí Navarro; Ignasi Modolell; Ferran Guedea
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 3.405

4.  A teaching intervention in a contouring dummy run improved target volume delineation in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Reducing the interobserver variability in multicentre clinical studies.

Authors:  Tanja Schimek-Jasch; Esther G C Troost; Gerta Rücker; Vesna Prokic; Melanie Avlar; Viola Duncker-Rohr; Michael Mix; Christian Doll; Anca-Ligia Grosu; Ursula Nestle
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 3.621

5.  Comparison of intensity-modulated radiotherapy planning based on manual and automatically generated contours using deformable image registration in four-dimensional computed tomography of lung cancer patients.

Authors:  Elisabeth Weiss; Krishni Wijesooriya; Viswanathan Ramakrishnan; Paul J Keall
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2007-12-19       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Impact of Neuroradiology-Based Peer Review on Head and Neck Radiotherapy Target Delineation.

Authors:  S Braunstein; C M Glastonbury; J Chen; J M Quivey; S S Yom
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 3.825

7.  Interobserver variation in clinical target volume and organs at risk segmentation in post-parotidectomy radiotherapy: can segmentation protocols help?

Authors:  M Mukesh; R Benson; R Jena; A Hoole; T Roques; C Scrase; C Martin; G A Whitfield; J Gemmill; S Jefferies
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Target definition of moving lung tumors in positron emission tomography: correlation of optimal activity concentration thresholds with object size, motion extent, and source-to-background ratio.

Authors:  Adam C Riegel; M Kara Bucci; Osama R Mawlawi; Valen Johnson; Moiz Ahmad; Xiaojun Sun; Dershan Luo; Adam G Chandler; Tinsu Pan
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 9.  A review on segmentation of positron emission tomography images.

Authors:  Brent Foster; Ulas Bagci; Awais Mansoor; Ziyue Xu; Daniel J Mollura
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  2014-04-28       Impact factor: 4.589

10.  A semiautomatic CT-based ensemble segmentation of lung tumors: comparison with oncologists' delineations and with the surgical specimen.

Authors:  Emmanuel Rios Velazquez; Hugo J W L Aerts; Yuhua Gu; Dmitry B Goldgof; Dirk De Ruysscher; Andre Dekker; René Korn; Robert J Gillies; Philippe Lambin
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 6.280

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.