PURPOSE: To compare computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) for delineation of gross tumor volume (GTV) in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma and to validate results with the macroscopic surgical specimen when available. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with stages II-IV squamous cell carcinoma treated with radiation therapy or chemotherapy and radiation therapy (n = 20) or with total laryngectomy (n = 9) were enrolled. Ten patients had oropharyngeal, 13 had laryngeal, and six had hypopharyngeal tumors. CT, MR imaging, and PET were performed with patients immobilized in a customized thermoplastic mask, and images were coregistered. GTVs obtained with the three modalities were compared quantitatively and qualitatively. If patients underwent total laryngectomy, images were validated with the surgical specimen after three-dimensional coregistration. The effect of each modality was estimated with linear mixed-effects models. Adjustments for multiple comparisons were made with the Bonferonni or Sidak method. RESULTS: For oropharyngeal tumors and for laryngeal or hypopharyngeal tumors, no significant difference (P >.99) was observed between average GTVs delineated at CT (32.0 and 21.4 cm(3), respectively) or MR imaging (27.9 and 21.4 cm(3), respectively), whereas average GTVs at PET were smaller (20.3 [P </=.10] and 16.4 cm(3) [P </=.01], respectively). GTVs from surgical specimens were significantly smaller (12.6 cm(3), P </=.06). In nine patients for whom a surgical specimen was available, no modality adequately depicted superficial tumor extension; this was due to limitations in spatial resolution. In addition, false-positive results were seen for cartilage, extralaryngeal, and preepiglottic extensions. CONCLUSION: Compared with GTVs at CT and MR imaging, GTVs at FDG PET were smaller. In nine patients for whom a surgical specimen was available, PET was found to be the most accurate modality. However, no modality managed to depict superficial tumor extension. Copyright RSNA, 2004
PURPOSE: To compare computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) for delineation of gross tumor volume (GTV) in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma and to validate results with the macroscopic surgical specimen when available. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with stages II-IV squamous cell carcinoma treated with radiation therapy or chemotherapy and radiation therapy (n = 20) or with total laryngectomy (n = 9) were enrolled. Ten patients had oropharyngeal, 13 had laryngeal, and six had hypopharyngeal tumors. CT, MR imaging, and PET were performed with patients immobilized in a customized thermoplastic mask, and images were coregistered. GTVs obtained with the three modalities were compared quantitatively and qualitatively. If patients underwent total laryngectomy, images were validated with the surgical specimen after three-dimensional coregistration. The effect of each modality was estimated with linear mixed-effects models. Adjustments for multiple comparisons were made with the Bonferonni or Sidak method. RESULTS: For oropharyngeal tumors and for laryngeal or hypopharyngeal tumors, no significant difference (P >.99) was observed between average GTVs delineated at CT (32.0 and 21.4 cm(3), respectively) or MR imaging (27.9 and 21.4 cm(3), respectively), whereas average GTVs at PET were smaller (20.3 [P </=.10] and 16.4 cm(3) [P </=.01], respectively). GTVs from surgical specimens were significantly smaller (12.6 cm(3), P </=.06). In nine patients for whom a surgical specimen was available, no modality adequately depicted superficial tumor extension; this was due to limitations in spatial resolution. In addition, false-positive results were seen for cartilage, extralaryngeal, and preepiglottic extensions. CONCLUSION: Compared with GTVs at CT and MR imaging, GTVs at FDG PET were smaller. In nine patients for whom a surgical specimen was available, PET was found to be the most accurate modality. However, no modality managed to depict superficial tumor extension. Copyright RSNA, 2004
Authors: Tony Shepherd; Mika Teras; Reinhard R Beichel; Ronald Boellaard; Michel Bruynooghe; Volker Dicken; Mark J Gooding; Peter J Julyan; John A Lee; Sébastien Lefèvre; Michael Mix; Valery Naranjo; Xiaodong Wu; Habib Zaidi; Ziming Zeng; Heikki Minn Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2012-06-04 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Karen P Chu; James D Murphy; Trang H La; Trevor E Krakow; Andrei Iagaru; Edward E Graves; Annie Hsu; Peter G Maxim; Billy Loo; Daniel T Chang; Quynh-Thu Le Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-01-21 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Chad Tang; James D Murphy; Brian Khong; Trang H La; Christina Kong; Nancy J Fischbein; A Dimitrios Colevas; Andrei H Iagaru; Edward E Graves; Billy W Loo; Quynh-Thu Le Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-01-21 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Ralph A Bundschuh; Christina M Wendl; Gregor Weirich; Mathias Eiber; Michael Souvatzoglou; Uwe Treiber; Hubert Kübler; Tobias Maurer; Jürgen E Gschwend; Hans Geinitz; Anca L Grosu; Sibylle I Ziegler; Bernd Joachim Krause Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Patrick Veit-Haibach; Christopher Luczak; Isabel Wanke; Markus Fischer; Thomas Egelhof; Thomas Beyer; Gerlinde Dahmen; Andreas Bockisch; Sandra Rosenbaum; Gerald Antoch Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2007-08-24 Impact factor: 9.236