PURPOSE: Positron emission tomography is the most advanced scintigraphic imaging technology and can be employed in the planning of radiation therapy (RT). The aim of this study was to evaluate the possible role of fused images (anatomical CT and functional FDG-PET), acquired with a dedicated PET/CT scanner, in delineating gross tumour volume (GTV) and clinical target volume (CTV) in selected patients and thus in facilitating RT planning. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients were examined, 24 with lung cancer (17 non-small cell and seven small cell) and four with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in the head and neck region. All patients underwent a whole-body PET scan after a CT scan. The CT images provided morphological volumetric information, and in a second step, the corresponding PET images were overlaid to define the effective target volume. The images were exported off-line via an internal network to an RT simulator. RESULTS: Three patient were excluded from the study owing to change in the disease stage subsequent to the PET/CT study. Among the remaining 25 patients, PET significantly altered the GTV or CTV in 11 (44%) . In five of these 11 cases there was a reduction in GTV or CTV, while in six there was an increase in GTV or CTV. CONCLUSION: FDG-PET is a highly sensitive imaging modality that offers better visualisation of local and locoregional tumour extension. This study confirmed that co-registration of CT data and FDG-PET images may lead to significant modifications of RT planning and patient management.
PURPOSE: Positron emission tomography is the most advanced scintigraphic imaging technology and can be employed in the planning of radiation therapy (RT). The aim of this study was to evaluate the possible role of fused images (anatomical CT and functional FDG-PET), acquired with a dedicated PET/CT scanner, in delineating gross tumour volume (GTV) and clinical target volume (CTV) in selected patients and thus in facilitating RT planning. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients were examined, 24 with lung cancer (17 non-small cell and seven small cell) and four with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in the head and neck region. All patients underwent a whole-body PET scan after a CT scan. The CT images provided morphological volumetric information, and in a second step, the corresponding PET images were overlaid to define the effective target volume. The images were exported off-line via an internal network to an RT simulator. RESULTS: Three patient were excluded from the study owing to change in the disease stage subsequent to the PET/CT study. Among the remaining 25 patients, PET significantly altered the GTV or CTV in 11 (44%) . In five of these 11 cases there was a reduction in GTV or CTV, while in six there was an increase in GTV or CTV. CONCLUSION: FDG-PET is a highly sensitive imaging modality that offers better visualisation of local and locoregional tumour extension. This study confirmed that co-registration of CT data and FDG-PET images may lead to significant modifications of RT planning and patient management.
Authors: U Nestle; K Walter; S Schmidt; N Licht; C Nieder; B Motaref; D Hellwig; M Niewald; D Ukena; C M Kirsch; G W Sybrecht; K Schnabel Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1999-06-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J D Chapman; Jeffrey D Bradley; Janet F Eary; Roland Haubner; S M Larson; Jeff Michael Michalski; Paul G Okunieff; H W Strauss; Y C Ung; Michael J Welch Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2003-02-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: P Giraud; D Grahek; F Montravers; M F Carette; E Deniaud-Alexandre; F Julia; J C Rosenwald; J M Cosset; J N Talbot; M Housset; E Touboul Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2001-04-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Christopher Scarfone; William C Lavely; Anthony J Cmelak; Dominique Delbeke; William H Martin; Dean Billheimer; Dennis E Hallahan Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Didier Lardinois; Walter Weder; Thomas F Hany; Ehab M Kamel; Stephan Korom; Burkhardt Seifert; Gustav K von Schulthess; Hans C Steinert Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J D Kiffer; S U Berlangieri; A M Scott; G Quong; M Feigen; W Schumer; C P Clarke; S R Knight; F J Daniel Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Anna C Pfannenberg; Philip Aschoff; Klaus Brechtel; Mark Müller; Roland Bares; Frank Paulsen; Jutta Scheiderbauer; Godehard Friedel; Claus D Claussen; Susanne M Eschmann Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2006-08-01 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Gregory Sharp; Karl D Fritscher; Vladimir Pekar; Marta Peroni; Nadya Shusharina; Harini Veeraraghavan; Jinzhong Yang Journal: Med Phys Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Radovan Vojtíšek; Jan Mužík; Pavel Slampa; Marie Budíková; Jaroslav Hejsek; Petr Smolák; Jiří Ferda; Jindřich Fínek Journal: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother Date: 2013-10-17
Authors: Dominic A X Schinagl; Paul N Span; Frank J A van den Hoogen; Matthias A W Merkx; Piet J Slootweg; Wim J G Oyen; Johannes H A M Kaanders Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-08-14 Impact factor: 9.236