PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate if FDG-PET and DWI identify the same or different targets for dose escalation in the GTV of HN cancer patients. Additionally, the dose coverage of DWI-targets in an FDG-PET-based dose painting plan was analyzed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen HN cancer patients underwent FDG-PET and DWI exams, which were converted to standardized uptake value (SUV)- and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC)-maps. The correspondence between the two imaging modalities was determined on a voxel-level using Spearman's correlation coefficient (ρ). Dose painting plans were optimized based on the 50% isocontour of the maximum SUV ( SUV(50%max)). Dose coverage was analyzed in three different SUV- and three different ADC-targets using the mean dose and the near-minimum and near-maximum doses. RESULTS: The average maximum SUV was 13.9 and the mean ADC was 1.17 · 10(-3) mm(2)/s. The average ρ between SUV and ADC was -0.2 (range: -0.6 to 0.4). The ADC-targets were only partly overlapping the SUV(50%max)-target and the dose parameters were significantly smaller in the ADC-targets compared to the SUV(50%max)-target. CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET and DWI contain different information, resulting in different targets. Further information about failure patterns and dose relations can be obtained by adding DWI to currently ongoing dose painting trials.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate if FDG-PET and DWI identify the same or different targets for dose escalation in the GTV of HN cancerpatients. Additionally, the dose coverage of DWI-targets in an FDG-PET-based dose painting plan was analyzed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen HN cancerpatients underwent FDG-PET and DWI exams, which were converted to standardized uptake value (SUV)- and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC)-maps. The correspondence between the two imaging modalities was determined on a voxel-level using Spearman's correlation coefficient (ρ). Dose painting plans were optimized based on the 50% isocontour of the maximum SUV ( SUV(50%max)). Dose coverage was analyzed in three different SUV- and three different ADC-targets using the mean dose and the near-minimum and near-maximum doses. RESULTS: The average maximum SUV was 13.9 and the mean ADC was 1.17 · 10(-3) mm(2)/s. The average ρ between SUV and ADC was -0.2 (range: -0.6 to 0.4). The ADC-targets were only partly overlapping the SUV(50%max)-target and the dose parameters were significantly smaller in the ADC-targets compared to the SUV(50%max)-target. CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET and DWI contain different information, resulting in different targets. Further information about failure patterns and dose relations can be obtained by adding DWI to currently ongoing dose painting trials.
Authors: Abdallah S R Mohamed; Carlos E Cardenas; Adam S Garden; Musaddiq J Awan; Crosby D Rock; Sarah A Westergaard; G Brandon Gunn; Abdelaziz M Belal; Ahmed G El-Gowily; Stephen Y Lai; David I Rosenthal; Clifton D Fuller; Michalis Aristophanous Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2017-07-31 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Kerstin Zwirner; Daniela Thorwarth; René M Winter; Stefan Welz; Jakob Weiss; Nina F Schwenzer; Holger Schmidt; Christian la Fougère; Konstantin Nikolaou; Daniel Zips; Sergios Gatidis Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2018-03-21 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Yao Ding; Abdallah S R Mohamed; Jinzhong Yang; Rivka R Colen; Steven J Frank; Jihong Wang; Eslam Y Wassal; Wenjie Wang; Michael E Kantor; Peter A Balter; David I Rosenthal; Stephen Y Lai; John D Hazle; Clifton D Fuller Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2014-12-17