PURPOSE: Cardiac toxicity is an important sequela of breast radiotherapy. However, the relationship between dose to cardiac structures and subsequent toxicity has not been well defined, partially due to variations in substructure delineation, which can lead to inconsistent dose reporting and the failure to detect potential correlations. Here we have developed a heart atlas and evaluated its effect on contour accuracy and concordance. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A detailed cardiac computed tomography scan atlas was developed jointly by cardiology, cardiac radiology, and radiation oncology. Seven radiation oncologists were recruited to delineate the whole heart, left main and left anterior descending interventricular branches, and right coronary arteries on four cases before and after studying the atlas. Contour accuracy was assessed by percent overlap with gold standard atlas volumes. The concordance index was also calculated. Standard radiation fields were applied. Doses to observer-contoured cardiac structures were calculated and compared with gold standard contour doses. Pre- and post-atlas values were analyzed using a paired t test. RESULTS: The cardiac atlas significantly improved contour accuracy and concordance. Percent overlap and concordance index of observer-contoured cardiac and gold standard volumes were 2.3-fold improved for all structures (p < 0.002). After application of the atlas, reported mean doses to the whole heart, left main artery, left anterior descending interventricular branch, and right coronary artery were within 0.1, 0.9, 2.6, and 0.6 Gy, respectively, of gold standard doses. CONCLUSIONS: This validated University of Michigan cardiac atlas may serve as a useful tool in future studies assessing cardiac toxicity and in clinical trials which include dose volume constraints to the heart.
PURPOSE:Cardiac toxicity is an important sequela of breast radiotherapy. However, the relationship between dose to cardiac structures and subsequent toxicity has not been well defined, partially due to variations in substructure delineation, which can lead to inconsistent dose reporting and the failure to detect potential correlations. Here we have developed a heart atlas and evaluated its effect on contour accuracy and concordance. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A detailed cardiac computed tomography scan atlas was developed jointly by cardiology, cardiac radiology, and radiation oncology. Seven radiation oncologists were recruited to delineate the whole heart, left main and left anterior descending interventricular branches, and right coronary arteries on four cases before and after studying the atlas. Contour accuracy was assessed by percent overlap with gold standard atlas volumes. The concordance index was also calculated. Standard radiation fields were applied. Doses to observer-contoured cardiac structures were calculated and compared with gold standard contour doses. Pre- and post-atlas values were analyzed using a paired t test. RESULTS: The cardiac atlas significantly improved contour accuracy and concordance. Percent overlap and concordance index of observer-contoured cardiac and gold standard volumes were 2.3-fold improved for all structures (p < 0.002). After application of the atlas, reported mean doses to the whole heart, left main artery, left anterior descending interventricular branch, and right coronary artery were within 0.1, 0.9, 2.6, and 0.6 Gy, respectively, of gold standard doses. CONCLUSIONS: This validated University of Michigan cardiac atlas may serve as a useful tool in future studies assessing cardiac toxicity and in clinical trials which include dose volume constraints to the heart.
Authors: Lawrence B Marks; Xiaoli Yu; Robert G Prosnitz; Su-Min Zhou; Patricia H Hardenbergh; Michael Blazing; Donna Hollis; Pehr Lind; Andrea Tisch; Terence Z Wong; Salvador Borges-Neto Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-09-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: M Clarke; R Collins; S Darby; C Davies; P Elphinstone; V Evans; J Godwin; R Gray; C Hicks; S James; E MacKinnon; P McGale; T McHugh; R Peto; C Taylor; Y Wang Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-12-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Paul A Heidenreich; Ingela Schnittger; H William Strauss; Randall H Vagelos; Byron K Lee; Carol S Mariscal; David J Tate; Sandra J Horning; Richard T Hoppe; Steven L Hancock Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-01-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Eleanor E R Harris; Candace Correa; Wei-Ting Hwang; Jessica Liao; Harold I Litt; Victor A Ferrari; Lawrence J Solin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-08-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Felix Y Feng; Hyungjin M Kim; Teresa H Lyden; Marc J Haxer; Mary Feng; Frank P Worden; Douglas B Chepeha; Avraham Eisbruch Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-06-07 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Candace R Correa; Harold I Litt; Wei-Ting Hwang; Victor A Ferrari; Lawrence J Solin; Eleanor E Harris Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Maartje J Hooning; Akke Botma; Berthe M P Aleman; Margreet H A Baaijens; Harry Bartelink; Jan G M Klijn; Carolyn W Taylor; Flora E van Leeuwen Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2007-03-07 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Musaddiq Awan; Steven Bedrick; Coen R N Rasch; David I Rosenthal; Clifton D Fuller Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 4.056
Authors: S Schönecker; C Heinz; M Söhn; W Haimerl; S Corradini; M Pazos; C Belka; H Scheithauer Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2016-09-08 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: S Vennarini; N Fournier-Bidoz; C Aristei; C E de Almeida; V Servois; F Campana; V Mosseri; A Fourquet; Y M Kirova Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2013-02-25 Impact factor: 3.039