Does registration of PET and planning CT images decrease interobserver and intraobserver variation in delineating tumor volumes for non-small-cell lung cancer?

Journal Article · Sun May 01 04:00:00 EDT 2005 · International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.09.020· OSTI ID:20698410

Fox, Jana L ^[1]; Rengan, Ramesh ^[1]; O'Meara, William ^[1]; Yorke, Ellen ^[2]; Erdi, Yusuf ^[2]; Nehmeh, Sadek ^[2]; Leibel, Steven A ^[1]; Rosenzweig, Kenneth E ^[1]

---

1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (United States)
2. Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (United States)

Purpose: To compare tumor volume delineation using registered positron emission tomography (PET)/CT vs. side-by-side image sets. Methods and Materials: A total of 19 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer had 18-fluorine-deoxyglucose (FDG)-PET scans registered with planning CT scans. The disease was Stage I-II in 26%, IIIA in 42%, and IIIB in 32%. Two radiation oncologists contoured 9 tumor volumes using registered images (registered) and 10 using separate FDG-PET images as a guide (nonregistered). A third physician, who had done the treatment planning for these patients a median of 40 months before using registered images, repeated all contours: 10 on registered images (registered/registered) and 9 without registration (registered/nonregistered). Each pair of volumes (A and B) was compared. Quantitative comparison used the concordance index, (A intersection B)/(A union B). For qualitative analysis, pairs of volumes were projected onto digitally reconstructed radiographs. The differences were graded as insignificant, minor, moderate, or major. Results: The median interobserver percentage of concordance among nonregistered pairs was 61% vs. 70% in the registered group (p <0.05). On qualitative analysis, in the nonregistered group, the differences were insignificant in 5, minor in 3, and moderate in 2 of 10. The differences in the registered group were insignificant in 7 and minor in 2 of 9. The median intraobserver percentage of concordance in the registered/nonregistered group was 58% vs. 71% in the registered/registered group (p = 0.10). On qualitative analysis, the intraobserver differences in the registered/nonregistered group were insignificant in 2, minor in 2, moderate in 0, and major in 5 of 9. In the registered/registered group, the differences were insignificant in 2, minor in 6, moderate in 2, and major in 0 of 10. Conclusion: Registration of FDG-PET and planning CT images results in greater consistency in tumor volume delineation.

• OSTI ID: 20698410
• Journal Information: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics, Journal Name: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics Journal Issue: 1 Vol. 62; ISSN IOBPD3; ISSN 0360-3016
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE
CARCINOMAS
COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY
FLUORINE 18
IMAGES
LUNGS
MEDICAL PERSONNEL
PATIENTS
PLANNING
POSITRON COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY
RADIOTHERAPY