OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the tumor volume between magnetic resonance imaging-defined gross tumor volume (MR-GTV) and positron emission tomography-defined GTV (PET-GTV) in cervical cancer with hybrid PET/MR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-seven patients with cervical cancer underwent PET/MR pelvic examination before radiotherapy. The MR-GTV was manually outlined on T2-weighted MR images. The PET-GTV was autocontoured on PET images using a 40% maximum standardized uptake value threshold. Results were analyzed by Pearson analysis, Bland-Altman plot, and 1-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: Magnetic resonance imaging-GTV significantly correlated with PET-GTV (r(2) = 0.797, P < 0.001). The Bland-Altman plot showed a bad agreement between MR-GTV and PET-GTV. The PET-GTV underestimated the MR-GTV in 23 of 27 tumors. Patients were divided into the following 3 groups according to MR-GTV: less than 14 mL (n = 6), 14 to 62 mL (n = 12), and 62 mL or more (n = 9). The mean (SD) MR-GTV, PET-GTV, ratio, and overlap between MR-GTV and PET-GTV for the less than 14 mL cohort were 9.6 (2.6) mL, 16.7 (10.1) mL, 0.77 (0.40), and 0.47 (0.20), respectively. The PET-GTV overestimated MR-GTV in 4 of the 6 lesions by a mean (SD) of 11.1 (9.4) mL. Among the 14 to 62 mL cohort, the mean (SD) MR-GTV, PET-GTV, ratio, and overlap were 38.6 (14.5) mL, 24.9 (8.6 mL), 1.54 (0.25), and 0.87 (0.08), respectively. The PET-GTV underestimated MR-GTV for 12 tumors by a mean (SD) of 13.7 (8.4) mL. In the 62 mL or more cohort, the mean (SD) MR-GTV, PET-GTV, ratio, and overlap were 85.9 (25.8) mL, 54.3 (14.1) mL, 1.61 (0.35), and 0.87 (0.09), respectively. The PET-GTV underestimated MR-GTV 9 tumors by a mean (SD) of 31.6 (19.5) mL. The ratio and overlap differences were statistically significant among groups (F = 14.619, P < 0.001; F = 25.134, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Tumor volume discrepancies were observed between MR-GTV and PET-GTV for cervical cancer. With an increasing tumor volume, there was an increase in the difference between MR-GTV and PET-GTV. In addition, larger tumors had a higher degree of overlap compared with small tumors.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the tumor volume between magnetic resonance imaging-defined gross tumor volume (MR-GTV) and positron emission tomography-defined GTV (PET-GTV) in cervical cancer with hybrid PET/MR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-seven patients with cervical cancer underwent PET/MR pelvic examination before radiotherapy. The MR-GTV was manually outlined on T2-weighted MR images. The PET-GTV was autocontoured on PET images using a 40% maximum standardized uptake value threshold. Results were analyzed by Pearson analysis, Bland-Altman plot, and 1-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: Magnetic resonance imaging-GTV significantly correlated with PET-GTV (r(2) = 0.797, P < 0.001). The Bland-Altman plot showed a bad agreement between MR-GTV and PET-GTV. The PET-GTV underestimated the MR-GTV in 23 of 27 tumors. Patients were divided into the following 3 groups according to MR-GTV: less than 14 mL (n = 6), 14 to 62 mL (n = 12), and 62 mL or more (n = 9). The mean (SD) MR-GTV, PET-GTV, ratio, and overlap between MR-GTV and PET-GTV for the less than 14 mL cohort were 9.6 (2.6) mL, 16.7 (10.1) mL, 0.77 (0.40), and 0.47 (0.20), respectively. The PET-GTV overestimated MR-GTV in 4 of the 6 lesions by a mean (SD) of 11.1 (9.4) mL. Among the 14 to 62 mL cohort, the mean (SD) MR-GTV, PET-GTV, ratio, and overlap were 38.6 (14.5) mL, 24.9 (8.6 mL), 1.54 (0.25), and 0.87 (0.08), respectively. The PET-GTV underestimated MR-GTV for 12 tumors by a mean (SD) of 13.7 (8.4) mL. In the 62 mL or more cohort, the mean (SD) MR-GTV, PET-GTV, ratio, and overlap were 85.9 (25.8) mL, 54.3 (14.1) mL, 1.61 (0.35), and 0.87 (0.09), respectively. The PET-GTV underestimated MR-GTV 9 tumors by a mean (SD) of 31.6 (19.5) mL. The ratio and overlap differences were statistically significant among groups (F = 14.619, P < 0.001; F = 25.134, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Tumor volume discrepancies were observed between MR-GTV and PET-GTV for cervical cancer. With an increasing tumor volume, there was an increase in the difference between MR-GTV and PET-GTV. In addition, larger tumors had a higher degree of overlap compared with small tumors.