Tomohiro Matsuura1,2, Yasumasa Nishimura3, Kiyoshi Nakamatsu3, Shuichi Kanamori3, Kazuki Ishikawa3, Izumi Tachibana3, Makoto Hosono4, Toru Shibata5. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Kindai University, 377-2 Ohno-Higashi, Osaka-Sayama, Osaka, 589-8511, Japan. fondriest.italy@gmail.com. 2. Departments of Radiation Oncology, Nara Hospital, Kindai University, 1248-1 Otoda-cho, Ikoma, Nara, 630-0293, Japan. fondriest.italy@gmail.com. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Kindai University, 377-2 Ohno-Higashi, Osaka-Sayama, Osaka, 589-8511, Japan. 4. PET, Faculty of Medicine, Kindai University, 377-2 Ohno-Higashi, Osaka-Sayama, Osaka, 589-8511, Japan. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, Kagawa University, 1750-1 Ikenobe, Miki-cho, Kita-Gun, Kagawa, 761-0793, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical results of computed tomography (CT) simulations and [18F]-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/CT simulations were compared retrospectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2006 and 2011, [18F]-FDG PET/CT simulation was performed on 68 consecutive patients with pharyngeal cancers (PET/CT group). As an historical control, conventional CT simulation was performed on 56 consecutive patients with pharyngeal cancer between 2000 and 2006 (CT group). In the PET/CT group, the primary sites were nasopharynx (NPC), oropharynx (OPC), and hypopharynx (HPC) in 35, 20, and 13 patients, respectively; in the CT group, the primary sites were NPC, OPC, and HPC in 21, 17, and 18 patients, respectively. All but five patients in the PET/CT group were treated with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). RESULTS: In the PET/CT group, TNM and clinical stages changed in 11 (16 %) and eight (12 %) patients, respectively. Although the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates for the PET/CT and the CT groups were 80 and 64 %, respectively (p = 0.0420), this result may be attributable to the background difference between the two groups. Similarly, the 5-year locoregional control rates of the two groups were 82 and 70 %, respectively (p = 0.0501). Notably, marginal recurrences around the planning target volume (PTV) were only noted in four CT group patients. CONCLUSION: PET/CT simulation was useful for delineating an accurate clinical target volume (CTV) of pharyngeal cancer, and its clinical results were satisfactory.
BACKGROUND: Clinical results of computed tomography (CT) simulations and [18F]-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/CT simulations were compared retrospectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2006 and 2011, [18F]-FDG PET/CT simulation was performed on 68 consecutive patients with pharyngeal cancers (PET/CT group). As an historical control, conventional CT simulation was performed on 56 consecutive patients with pharyngeal cancer between 2000 and 2006 (CT group). In the PET/CT group, the primary sites were nasopharynx (NPC), oropharynx (OPC), and hypopharynx (HPC) in 35, 20, and 13 patients, respectively; in the CT group, the primary sites were NPC, OPC, and HPC in 21, 17, and 18 patients, respectively. All but five patients in the PET/CT group were treated with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). RESULTS: In the PET/CT group, TNM and clinical stages changed in 11 (16 %) and eight (12 %) patients, respectively. Although the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates for the PET/CT and the CT groups were 80 and 64 %, respectively (p = 0.0420), this result may be attributable to the background difference between the two groups. Similarly, the 5-year locoregional control rates of the two groups were 82 and 70 %, respectively (p = 0.0501). Notably, marginal recurrences around the planning target volume (PTV) were only noted in four CT group patients. CONCLUSION: PET/CT simulation was useful for delineating an accurate clinical target volume (CTV) of pharyngeal cancer, and its clinical results were satisfactory.
Entities:
Keywords:
Head and neck cancer; Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT); Marginal recurrence; PET/CT; Simulation; [18F]-FDG
Authors: Melanie B Fukui; Todd M Blodgett; Carl H Snyderman; Jonas J Johnson; Eugene N Myers; Dave W Townsend; Carolyn C Meltzer Journal: Radiographics Date: 2005 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Dian Wang; Christopher J Schultz; Paul A Jursinic; Mirek Bialkowski; X Ronald Zhu; W Douglas Brown; Scott D Rand; Michelle A Michel; Bruce H Campbell; Stuart Wong; X Allen Li; J Frank Wilson Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: K S Clifford Chao; Gokhan Ozyigit; Binh N Tran; Mustafa Cengiz; James F Dempsey; Daniel A Low Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2003-02-01 Impact factor: 7.038