PURPOSE: Target-volume delineation for radiation treatment to the head and neck area traditionally is based on physical examination, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging. Additional molecular imaging with (18)F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET) may improve definition of the gross tumor volume (GTV). In this study, five methods for tumor delineation on FDG-PET are compared with CT-based delineation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Seventy-eight patients with Stages II-IV squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck area underwent coregistered CT and FDG-PET. The primary tumor was delineated on CT, and five PET-based GTVs were obtained: visual interpretation, applying an isocontour of a standardized uptake value of 2.5, using a fixed threshold of 40% and 50% of the maximum signal intensity, and applying an adaptive threshold based on the signal-to-background ratio. Absolute GTV volumes were compared, and overlap analyses were performed. RESULTS: The GTV method of applying an isocontour of a standardized uptake value of 2.5 failed to provide successful delineation in 45% of cases. For the other PET delineation methods, volume and shape of the GTV were influenced heavily by the choice of segmentation tool. On average, all threshold-based PET-GTVs were smaller than on CT. Nevertheless, PET frequently detected significant tumor extension outside the GTV delineated on CT (15-34% of PET volume). CONCLUSIONS: The choice of segmentation tool for target-volume definition of head and neck cancer based on FDG-PET images is not trivial because it influences both volume and shape of the resulting GTV. With adequate delineation, PET may add significantly to CT- and physical examination-based GTV definition.
PURPOSE: Target-volume delineation for radiation treatment to the head and neck area traditionally is based on physical examination, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging. Additional molecular imaging with (18)F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET) may improve definition of the gross tumor volume (GTV). In this study, five methods for tumor delineation on FDG-PET are compared with CT-based delineation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Seventy-eight patients with Stages II-IV squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck area underwent coregistered CT and FDG-PET. The primary tumor was delineated on CT, and five PET-based GTVs were obtained: visual interpretation, applying an isocontour of a standardized uptake value of 2.5, using a fixed threshold of 40% and 50% of the maximum signal intensity, and applying an adaptive threshold based on the signal-to-background ratio. Absolute GTV volumes were compared, and overlap analyses were performed. RESULTS: The GTV method of applying an isocontour of a standardized uptake value of 2.5 failed to provide successful delineation in 45% of cases. For the other PET delineation methods, volume and shape of the GTV were influenced heavily by the choice of segmentation tool. On average, all threshold-based PET-GTVs were smaller than on CT. Nevertheless, PET frequently detected significant tumor extension outside the GTV delineated on CT (15-34% of PET volume). CONCLUSIONS: The choice of segmentation tool for target-volume definition of head and neck cancer based on FDG-PET images is not trivial because it influences both volume and shape of the resulting GTV. With adequate delineation, PET may add significantly to CT- and physical examination-based GTV definition.
Authors: Adam A Garsa; Albert J Chang; Todd Dewees; Christopher R Spencer; Douglas R Adkins; Farrokh Dehdashti; Hiram A Gay; Wade L Thorstad Journal: J Radiat Oncol Date: 2013-03
Authors: Mathieu Hatt; John A Lee; Charles R Schmidtlein; Issam El Naqa; Curtis Caldwell; Elisabetta De Bernardi; Wei Lu; Shiva Das; Xavier Geets; Vincent Gregoire; Robert Jeraj; Michael P MacManus; Osama R Mawlawi; Ursula Nestle; Andrei B Pugachev; Heiko Schöder; Tony Shepherd; Emiliano Spezi; Dimitris Visvikis; Habib Zaidi; Assen S Kirov Journal: Med Phys Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 4.071