INTRODUCTION: The study aims to compare the positional and volumetric differences of tumour volumes based on the maximum intensity projection (MIP) of four-dimensional CT (4DCT) and (18) F-fluorodexyglucose ((18) F-FDG) positron emission tomography CT (PET/CT) images for the primary tumour of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Ten patients with NSCLC underwent 4DCT and (18) F-FDG PET/CT scans of the thorax on the same day. Internal gross target volumes (IGTVs) of the primary tumours were contoured on the MIP images of 4DCT to generate IGTVMIP . Gross target volumes (GTVs) based on PET (GTVPET ) were determined with nine different threshold methods using the auto-contouring function. The differences in the volume, position, matching index (MI) and degree of inclusion (DI) of the GTVPET and IGTVMIP were investigated. RESULTS: In volume terms, GTVPET 2.0 and GTVPET 20% approximated closely to IGTVMIP with mean volume ratio of 0.93 ± 0.45 and 1.06 ± 0.43, respectively. The best MI was between IGTVMIP and GTVPET 20% (0.45 ± 0.23). The best DI of IGTVMIP in GTVPET was IGTVMIP in GTVPET 20% (0.61 ± 0.26). CONCLUSIONS: In 3D PET images, the GTVPET contoured by standardised uptake value (SUV) 2.0 or 20% of maximal SUV (SUVmax ) approximate closely to the IGTVMIP in target size, while the spatial mismatch is apparent between them. Therefore, neither of them could replace IGTVMIP in spatial position and form. The advent of 4D PET/CT may improve the accuracy of contouring the perimeter for moving targets.
INTRODUCTION: The study aims to compare the positional and volumetric differences of tumour volumes based on the maximum intensity projection (MIP) of four-dimensional CT (4DCT) and (18) F-fluorodexyglucose ((18) F-FDG) positron emission tomography CT (PET/CT) images for the primary tumour of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Ten patients with NSCLC underwent 4DCT and (18) F-FDG PET/CT scans of the thorax on the same day. Internal gross target volumes (IGTVs) of the primary tumours were contoured on the MIP images of 4DCT to generate IGTVMIP . Gross target volumes (GTVs) based on PET (GTVPET ) were determined with nine different threshold methods using the auto-contouring function. The differences in the volume, position, matching index (MI) and degree of inclusion (DI) of the GTVPET and IGTVMIP were investigated. RESULTS: In volume terms, GTVPET 2.0 and GTVPET 20% approximated closely to IGTVMIP with mean volume ratio of 0.93 ± 0.45 and 1.06 ± 0.43, respectively. The best MI was between IGTVMIP and GTVPET 20% (0.45 ± 0.23). The best DI of IGTVMIP in GTVPET was IGTVMIP in GTVPET 20% (0.61 ± 0.26). CONCLUSIONS: In 3D PET images, the GTVPET contoured by standardised uptake value (SUV) 2.0 or 20% of maximal SUV (SUVmax ) approximate closely to the IGTVMIP in target size, while the spatial mismatch is apparent between them. Therefore, neither of them could replace IGTVMIP in spatial position and form. The advent of 4D PET/CT may improve the accuracy of contouring the perimeter for moving targets.