[F18] FDG-PET/CT for manual or semiautomated GTV delineation of the primary tumor for radiation therapy planning in patients with esophageal cancer: is it useful?

Walter, Franziska; Jell, Constanze; Zollner, Barbara; Andrae, Claudia; Gerum, Sabine; Ilhan, Harun; Belka, Claus ; Niyazi, Maximilian und Roeder, Falk (2020): [F18] FDG-PET/CT for manual or semiautomated GTV delineation of the primary tumor for radiation therapy planning in patients with esophageal cancer: is it useful? In: Strahlentherapie und Onkologie

Abstract

BACKGROUND Target volume definition of the primary tumor in esophageal cancer is usually based on computed tomography (CT) supported by endoscopy and/or endoscopic ultrasound and can be difficult given the low soft-tissue contrast of CT resulting in large interobserver variability. We evaluated the value of a~dedicated planning F18 FDG-Positron emission tomography/computer tomography (PET/CT) for harmonization of gross tumor volume (GTV) delineation and the feasibility of semiautomated structures for planning purposes in a~large cohort. METHODS Patients receiving a~dedicated planning F18~FDG-PET/CT (06/2011-03/2016) were included. GTV was delineated on CT and on PET/CT (GTVCT and GTVPET/CT, respectively) by three independent radiation oncologists. Interobserver variability was evaluated by comparison of mean GTV and mean tumor lengths, and via Sørensen-Dice coefficients (DSC) for spatial overlap. Semiautomated volumes were constructed based on PET/CT using fixed standardized uptake values (SUV) thresholds (SUV30, 35, and 40) or background- and metabolically corrected PERCIST-TLG and Schaefer algorithms, and compared to manually delineated volumes. RESULTS 45~cases were evaluated. Mean GTVCT and GTVPET/CT were 59.2/58.0 ml, 65.4/64.1 ml, and 60.4/59.2 ml for observers~A-C. No significant difference between CT- and PET/CT-based delineation was found comparing the mean volumes or lengths. Mean Dice coefficients on CT and PET/CT were 0.79/0.77, 0.81/0.78, and 0.8/0.78 for observer pairs AB, AC, and BC, respectively, with no significant differences. Mean GTV volumes delineated semiautomatically with SUV30/SUV35/SUV40/Schaefer's and PERCIST-TLG threshold were 69.1/23.9/18.8/18.6 and 70.9 ml. The best concordance of a~semiautomatically delineated structure with the manually delineated GTVCT/GTVPET/CT was observed for PERCIST-TLG. CONCLUSION We were not able to show that the integration of PET/CT for GTV delineation of the primary tumor resulted in reduced interobserver variability. The PERCIST-TLG algorithm seemed most promising compared to other thresholds for further evaluation of semiautomated delineation of esophageal cancer.

• Dokumententyp: Zeitschriftenartikel
• Fakultät: Medizin
• Themengebiete: 600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften > 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
• Sprache: Englisch