PURPOSE: To evaluate intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment planning based on simultaneous positron-emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) of meningioma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A meningioma patient was examined prior to radiotherapy with dedicated planning computed tomography (CT), MRI, PET/CT with gallium-68-labeled DOTATOC (68Ga-DOTATOC), and simultaneous 68Ga-DOTATOC-PET/MRI. The first gross target volume (GTV) was defined based on a combination of separate MR and 68Ga-DOTATOC-PET/CT imaging (GTVPET/CT+MR). Then, the simultaneous PET/MR images were used to delineate a second GTV (GTVPET/MR) by following exactly the same delineation strategy. After an isotropic expansion of those volumes by a 4-mm safety margin, the resulting planning target volumes (PTVs) were compared by calculating the intersection volume and the relative complements. A cross-evaluation of IMRT plans was performed, where the treatment plan created for the PTVPET/CT+MR was applied to the PET/MR-based PTVPET/MR. RESULTS: Generally, target volumes for IMRT treatment planning did not differ between MRI plus 68Ga-DOTATOC-PET/CT and simultaneous PET/MR imaging. Only in certain regions of the GTV were differences observed. The overall volume of the PET/MR-based PTV was approximately the same as that obtained from PET/CT data. A small region of infiltrative tumor growth next to the main tumor mass was better visualized with combined PET/MR due to smaller PET voxel sizes and improved recovery. An IMRT treatment plan was optimized for the PTVPET/CT+MR. The evaluation of this plan with respect to the PTVPET/MR showed parts of the target volume that would not have received the full radiation dose after delineation of the tumor, based on simultaneous PET/MR. CONCLUSION: This case showed that differences in target volumes delineated on the basis of separate MR and PET/CT and simultaneous PET/MR may be observed that can have significant consequences for an effectively applied radiotherapy treatment plan.
PURPOSE: To evaluate intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment planning based on simultaneous positron-emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) of meningioma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A meningiomapatient was examined prior to radiotherapy with dedicated planning computed tomography (CT), MRI, PET/CT with gallium-68-labeled DOTATOC (68Ga-DOTATOC), and simultaneous 68Ga-DOTATOC-PET/MRI. The first gross target volume (GTV) was defined based on a combination of separate MR and 68Ga-DOTATOC-PET/CT imaging (GTVPET/CT+MR). Then, the simultaneous PET/MR images were used to delineate a second GTV (GTVPET/MR) by following exactly the same delineation strategy. After an isotropic expansion of those volumes by a 4-mm safety margin, the resulting planning target volumes (PTVs) were compared by calculating the intersection volume and the relative complements. A cross-evaluation of IMRT plans was performed, where the treatment plan created for the PTVPET/CT+MR was applied to the PET/MR-based PTVPET/MR. RESULTS: Generally, target volumes for IMRT treatment planning did not differ between MRI plus 68Ga-DOTATOC-PET/CT and simultaneous PET/MR imaging. Only in certain regions of the GTV were differences observed. The overall volume of the PET/MR-based PTV was approximately the same as that obtained from PET/CT data. A small region of infiltrative tumor growth next to the main tumor mass was better visualized with combined PET/MR due to smaller PET voxel sizes and improved recovery. An IMRT treatment plan was optimized for the PTVPET/CT+MR. The evaluation of this plan with respect to the PTVPET/MR showed parts of the target volume that would not have received the full radiation dose after delineation of the tumor, based on simultaneous PET/MR. CONCLUSION: This case showed that differences in target volumes delineated on the basis of separate MR and PET/CT and simultaneous PET/MR may be observed that can have significant consequences for an effectively applied radiotherapy treatment plan.
Authors: Uulke A van der Heide; Antonetta C Houweling; Greetje Groenendaal; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Philippe Lambin Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-07-06 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Dale L Bailey; Henryk Barthel; Bettina Beuthin-Baumann; Thomas Beyer; Sotirios Bisdas; Ronald Boellaard; Johannes Czernin; Alexander Drzezga; Ulrike Ernemann; Christiane Franzius; Brigitte Gückel; Rupert Handgretinger; Markus Hartenbach; Dirk Hellwig; Helen Nadel; Stephan G Nekolla; Thomas Pfluger; Bernd J Pichler; Harald H Quick; Osama Sabri; Bernhard Sattler; Jürgen Schäfer; Fritz Schick; Barry A Siegel; Heinz P Schlemmer; Nina F Schwenzer; Jörg van den Hoff; Patrick Veit-Haibach; Hans F Wehrl Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Michael Sommerauer; Jan-Karl Burkhardt; Karl Frontzek; Elisabeth Rushing; Alfred Buck; Niklaus Krayenbuehl; Michael Weller; Niklaus Schaefer; Felix P Kuhn Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2016-02-09 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Maya B Wolf; Clemens Kratochwil; Frederik L Giesel; Stephanie E Combs; Antonia Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss; Regula Gnirs; Matthias C Roethke; Heinz P Schlemmer; Uwe Haberkorn Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-07-09 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Thomas E Yankeelov; Todd E Peterson; Richard G Abramson; David Izquierdo-Garcia; David Garcia-Izquierdo; Lori R Arlinghaus; Xia Li; Nkiruka C Atuegwu; Ciprian Catana; H Charles Manning; Zahi A Fayad; John C Gore Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-07-15 Impact factor: 2.546