OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of using cone beam CT (CBCT) scans obtained in radiation studies using the small-animal radiation research platform to perform semi-automatic tumour segmentation of pre-clinical tumour volumes. METHODS: Volume measurements were evaluated for different anatomical tumour sites, the flank, thigh and dorsum of the hind foot, for a variety of tumour cell lines. The estimated tumour volumes from CBCT and manual calliper measurements using different volume equations were compared with the "gold standard", measured by weighing the tumours following euthanasia and tumour resection. The correlation between tumour volumes estimated with the different methods, compared with the gold standard, was estimated by the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, root-mean-square deviation and the coefficient of determination. RESULTS: The semi-automatic CBCT volume segmentation performed favourably compared with manual calliper measures for flank tumours ≤2 cm(3) and thigh tumours ≤1 cm(3). For tumours >2 cm(3) or foot tumours, the CBCT method was not able to accurately segment the tumour volumes and manual calliper measures were superior. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that tumour volumes of flank and thigh tumours, obtained as a part of radiation studies using image-guided small-animal irradiators, can be estimated more efficiently and accurately using semi-automatic segmentation from CBCT scans. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first study evaluating tumour volume assessment of pre-clinical subcutaneous tumours in different anatomical sites using on-board CBCT imaging. We also compared the accuracy of the CBCT method to manual calliper measures, using various volume calculation equations.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of using cone beam CT (CBCT) scans obtained in radiation studies using the small-animal radiation research platform to perform semi-automatic tumour segmentation of pre-clinical tumour volumes. METHODS: Volume measurements were evaluated for different anatomical tumour sites, the flank, thigh and dorsum of the hind foot, for a variety of tumour cell lines. The estimated tumour volumes from CBCT and manual calliper measurements using different volume equations were compared with the "gold standard", measured by weighing the tumours following euthanasia and tumour resection. The correlation between tumour volumes estimated with the different methods, compared with the gold standard, was estimated by the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, root-mean-square deviation and the coefficient of determination. RESULTS: The semi-automatic CBCT volume segmentation performed favourably compared with manual calliper measures for flank tumours ≤2 cm(3) and thigh tumours ≤1 cm(3). For tumours >2 cm(3) or foot tumours, the CBCT method was not able to accurately segment the tumour volumes and manual calliper measures were superior. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that tumour volumes of flank and thigh tumours, obtained as a part of radiation studies using image-guided small-animal irradiators, can be estimated more efficiently and accurately using semi-automatic segmentation from CBCT scans. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first study evaluating tumour volume assessment of pre-clinical subcutaneous tumours in different anatomical sites using on-board CBCT imaging. We also compared the accuracy of the CBCT method to manual calliper measures, using various volume calculation equations.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Gregory D Ayers; Eliot T McKinley; Ping Zhao; Jordan M Fritz; Rebecca E Metry; Brenton C Deal; Katrina M Adlerz; Robert J Coffey; H Charles Manning Journal: J Ultrasound Med Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: John Wong; Elwood Armour; Peter Kazanzides; Iulian Iordachita; Erik Tryggestad; Hua Deng; Mohammad Matinfar; Christopher Kennedy; Zejian Liu; Timothy Chan; Owen Gray; Frank Verhaegen; Todd McNutt; Eric Ford; Theodore L DeWeese Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Peter Dankerl; Alexander Cavallaro; Matthias Dietzel; Alexey Tsymbal; Martin Kramer; Sascha Seifert; Michael Uder; Matthias Hammon Journal: Cancer Imaging Date: 2014-04-22 Impact factor: 3.909
Authors: Eszter Lázár-Molnár; Lisa Scandiuzzi; Indranil Basu; Thomas Quinn; Eliezer Sylvestre; Edith Palmieri; Udupi A Ramagopal; Stanley G Nathenson; Chandan Guha; Steven C Almo Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2017-02-06 Impact factor: 8.143