PURPOSE: Curative intent management of retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) requires gross total resection. Preoperative radiotherapy (RT) often is used as an adjuvant to surgery, but recurrence rates remain high. To enhance RT efficacy with acceptable tolerance, there is interest in delivering "boost doses" of RT to high-risk areas of gross tumor volume (HR GTV) judged to be at risk for positive resection margins. We sought to evaluate variability in HR GTV boost target volume delineation among collaborating sarcoma radiation and surgical oncologist teams. METHODS: Radiation planning CT scans for three cases of RPS were distributed to seven paired radiation and surgical oncologist teams at six institutions. Teams contoured HR GTV boost volumes for each case. Analysis of contour agreement was performed using the simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) algorithm and kappa statistics. RESULTS: HRGTV boost volume contour agreement between the seven teams was "substantial" or "moderate" for all cases. Agreement was best on the torso wall posteriorly (abutting posterior chest abdominal wall) and medially (abutting ipsilateral para-vertebral space and great vessels). Contours varied more significantly abutting visceral organs due to differing surgical opinions regarding planned partial organ resection. CONCLUSIONS: Agreement of RPS HRGTV boost volumes between sarcoma radiation and surgical oncologist teams was substantial to moderate. Differences were most striking in regions abutting visceral organs, highlighting the importance of collaboration between the radiation and surgical oncologist for "individualized" target delineation on the basis of areas deemed at risk and planned resection.
PURPOSE: Curative intent management of retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) requires gross total resection. Preoperative radiotherapy (RT) often is used as an adjuvant to surgery, but recurrence rates remain high. To enhance RT efficacy with acceptable tolerance, there is interest in delivering "boost doses" of RT to high-risk areas of gross tumor volume (HR GTV) judged to be at risk for positive resection margins. We sought to evaluate variability in HR GTV boost target volume delineation among collaborating sarcoma radiation and surgical oncologist teams. METHODS: Radiation planning CT scans for three cases of RPS were distributed to seven paired radiation and surgical oncologist teams at six institutions. Teams contoured HR GTV boost volumes for each case. Analysis of contour agreement was performed using the simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) algorithm and kappa statistics. RESULTS: HRGTV boost volume contour agreement between the seven teams was "substantial" or "moderate" for all cases. Agreement was best on the torso wall posteriorly (abutting posterior chest abdominal wall) and medially (abutting ipsilateral para-vertebral space and great vessels). Contours varied more significantly abutting visceral organs due to differing surgical opinions regarding planned partial organ resection. CONCLUSIONS: Agreement of RPS HRGTV boost volumes between sarcoma radiation and surgical oncologist teams was substantial to moderate. Differences were most striking in regions abutting visceral organs, highlighting the importance of collaboration between the radiation and surgical oncologist for "individualized" target delineation on the basis of areas deemed at risk and planned resection.
Authors: Elizabeth H Baldini; Dian Wang; Rick L M Haas; Charles N Catton; Daniel J Indelicato; David G Kirsch; David Roberge; Kilian Salerno; Curtiland Deville; B Ashleigh Guadagnolo; Brian O'Sullivan; Ivy A Petersen; Cecile Le Pechoux; Ross A Abrams; Thomas F DeLaney Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-07-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Syvie Bonvalot; Chandrajit P Raut; Raphael E Pollock; Piotr Rutkowski; Dirk C Strauss; Andrew J Hayes; Frits Van Coevorden; Marco Fiore; Eberhard Stoeckle; Peter Hohenberger; Alessandro Gronchi Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2012-04-03 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: A Gronchi; R Miceli; C Colombo; S Stacchiotti; P Collini; L Mariani; C Sangalli; S Radaelli; R Sanfilippo; M Fiore; P G Casali Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2011-07-16 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Rawan Allozi; X Allen Li; Julia White; Aditya Apte; An Tai; Jeff M Michalski; Walter R Bosch; Issam El Naqa Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2010-08-11 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: C Le Péchoux; E Musat; C Baey; H Al Mokhles; P Terrier; J Domont; A Le Cesne; A Laplanche; S Bonvalot Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2012-11-02 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: William W Tseng; John E Madewell; Wei Wei; Neeta Somaiah; Alexander J Lazar; Markus P Ghadimi; Aviad Hoffman; Peter W T Pisters; Dina C Lev; Raphael E Pollock Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2014-04-07 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Elizabeth H Baldini; Ross A Abrams; Walter Bosch; David Roberge; Rick L M Haas; Charles N Catton; Daniel J Indelicato; Jeffrey R Olsen; Curtiland Deville; Yen-Lin Chen; Steven E Finkelstein; Thomas F DeLaney; Dian Wang Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Thomas F DeLaney; Yen-Lin Chen; Elizabeth H Baldini; Dian Wang; Judith Adams; Shea B Hickey; Beow Y Yeap; Stephen M Hahn; Karen De Amorim Bernstein; G Petur Nielsen; Edwin Choy; John T Mullen; Sam S Yoon Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2017-01-04
Authors: Pippa F Cosper; Jeffrey Olsen; Todd DeWees; Brian A Van Tine; William Hawkins; Jeff Michalski; Imran Zoberi Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2017-12-08 Impact factor: 3.481