Interobserver variability in target volume delineation for CT/MRI simulation and MRI guided adaptive radiotherapy in rectal cancer

Objectives: Quantify target volume delineation uncertainty for CT/MRI simulation and MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy in rectal cancer. Define optimal imaging sequences for target delineation. Methods: Six experienced radiation oncologists delineated CTVs on CT and 2D and 3D-MRI in three patients with rectal cancer, using consensus contouring guidelines. Tumour GTV (GTVp) was also contoured on MRI acquired week 0 and 3 of radiotherapy. A STAPLE contour was created and volume and interobserver variability metrics were analysed. Results: There were statistically significant differences in volume between observers for CT and 2D-MRI-defined CTVs (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between observers on 3D-MRI. Significant differences in volume were seen between observers for both 2D and 3D-MRI-defined GTVp at weeks 0 and 3 (p < 0.05). Good interobserver agreement (IOA) was seen for CTVs delineated on all imaging modalities with best IOA on 3D-MRI; median Conformity Index (CI) 0.74 for CT, 0.75 for 2D-MRI and 0.77 for 3D-MRI. IOA of MRI-defined GTVp week 0 was better compared to CT; CI 0.58 for CT, 0.62 for 2D-MRI and 0.7 for 3D-MRI. MRI-defined GTVp IOA week three was worse compared to week 0. Conclusions: Delineation on MRI results in smaller volumes and better IOA week 0 compared to CT. 3D-MRI provides the best IOA in CTV and GTVp. MRI-defined GTVp on images acquired week three showed worse IOA compared to week 0. This highlights the need for consensus guidelines in GTVp delineation on MRI during treatment course in the context of dose escalation MRI-guided rectal boost studies. Advances in knowledge: Optimal MRI sequences for CT/MRI simulation and MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy in rectal cancer have been defined.

PTV margin calculation for head and neck patients treated with VMAT: a systematic literature review

Aim: The intent of the review was to identify different methodological approaches used to calculate the planning target volume (PTV) margin for head and neck patients treated with volumetric arc therapy (VMAT), and whether the necessary factors to calculate the margin size with the selected formula were used. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive, systematic search of related studies was done using the Hydi search engine and different databases: MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, ProQuest (Nursing and Allied Health), Scopus, ScienceDirect and tipsRO. The literature search included studies published between January 2007 and December 2020. Eligibility screening was performed by two reviewers. Results: A total of seven studies were found. All the reviewed studies used the Van Herk formula to measure the PTV margin. None of the studies incorporated the systematic errors of target volume delineation in the PTV equation. Inter-fraction translational errors were assessed in all the studies, whilst intra-fraction errors were only included in the margin equation for two studies. The studies showed great heterogeneity in the key characteristics, aims and methods. Findings: Since systemic errors from target volume delineation were not considered and not all studies assess intra-fraction errors, PTV margins may be underestimated. The recommendations are that studies need to determine the effect of target volume variance on PTV margins. It is also recommended to compare PTV margin results using various formulas.

FDG-PET/CT and MR imaging for target volume delineation in rectal cancer radiotherapy treatment planning: a systematic review

Aim: The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise and summarise evidence surrounding the clinical use of fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for target volume delineation (TVD) in rectal cancer radiotherapy planning. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, CINAHL, Web of Science and Scopus databases and other sources were systematically queried using keywords and relevant synonyms. Eligible full-text studies were assessed for methodological quality using the QUADAS-2 tool. Results: Eight of the 1448 studies identified met the inclusion criteria. Findings showed that MRI significantly delineate larger tumour volumes (TVs) than FDG-PET/CT while diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) defined smaller gross tumour volumes (GTVs) compared to T2 weighted-Magnetic Resonance Image. CT-based GTVs were found to be larger compared to FDG-PET/CT. FDG-PET/CT also identified new lesions in 15–17% patients and TVs extending outside the routinely used clinical standard CT TV in 29–83% patients. Between observers, delineated volumes were similar and consistent between MRI sequences, whereas interobserver agreement was significantly improved with FDG-PET/CT than CT. Conclusion: FDG-PET/CT and DW-MRI appear to delineate smaller rectal TVs and show improved interobserver variability. Overall, this study provides valuable insights into the amount of attention in the research literature that has been paid to imaging for TVD in rectal cancer.

Prognostic Relevance of 18F-FDG-PET/CT-Guided Target Volume Delineation in Loco-Regionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinomas: A Comparative Study

IntroductionAn optimal approach to define tumor volume in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) remains unclear. This retrospective study aimed at comparing the outcomes and toxicities of different FDG-PET/CT-guided techniques for primary tumor volume delineation in locoregionally advanced NPC.MethodsFrom August 2015 to February 2018, 292 patients with stage III-IVB NPC received FDG-PET/CT-guided IMRT. Three PET/CT-based techniques were used to determine the gross tumor volume (GTV) as follows: visual criteria (group A; n = 98), a standard uptake value (SUV) threshold of 2.5 (group B; n = 95), and a threshold of 50% maximal intensity (group C, n = 99) combined with a dose-painting technique.ResultsIn groups A, B, and C, the 5-year LRFS rates were 89.4%, 90.0%, and 97.8%, respectively (p = 0.043). The 5-year DMFS rates were 75.1%, 76.0%, and 87.7%, respectively (p = 0.043). The 5-year DFS rates were 70.9%, 70.3%, and 82.2%, respectively (p = 0.048). The 5-year OS rates were 73.5%, 73.9%, and 84.9%, respectively (p = 0.038). Group C showed significantly higher 5-year LRFS, LRRFS, DMFS, DFS, and OS than those in groups A and B (p &lt; 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed between the three study groups in the cumulative incidences of grade 3-4 acute and late toxicities. Multivariate analyses showed that the PET/CT-guided technique for target volume delineation was an independent prognostic factor for 5-year LRFS, DFS, DMFS, and OS (p = 0.039, p = 0.030, p = 0.035 and p = 0.028, respectively), and was marginally significant in predicting LRRFS (p = 0.080).ConclusionsThe 50% SUVmax threshold regimen for GTV delineation with dose-painting appeared to be superior to the visual criteria or SUV2.5 threshold in locoregionally advanced NPC, and there was no increased toxicity.

Types of deviation and review criteria in pretreatment central quality control of tumor bed boost in medulloblastoma—an analysis of the German Radiotherapy Quality Control Panel in the SIOP PNET5 MB trial

Purpose In Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, pretreatment radiotherapy quality control (RT-QC) for tumor bed boost (TB) in non-metastatic medulloblastoma (MB) was not mandatory but was recommended for patients enrolled in the SIOP PNET5 MB trial between 2014 and 2018. This individual case review (ICR) analysis aimed to evaluate types of deviations in the initial plan proposals and develop uniform review criteria for TB boost. Patients and methods A total of 78 patients were registered in this trial, of whom a subgroup of 65 patients were available for evaluation of the TB treatment plans. Dose uniformity was evaluated according to the definitions of the protocol. Additional RT-QC criteria for standardized review of target contours were elaborated and data evaluated accordingly. Results Of 65 initial TB plan proposals, 27 (41.5%) revealed deviations of target volume delineation. Deviations according to the dose uniformity criteria were present in 14 (21.5%) TB plans. In 25 (38.5%) cases a modification of the RT plan was recommended. Rejection of the TB plans was rather related to unacceptable target volume delineation than to insufficient dose uniformity. Conclusion In this analysis of pretreatment RT-QC, protocol deviations were present in a high proportion of initial TB plan proposals. These findings emphasize the importance of pretreatment RT-QC in clinical trials for MB. Based on these data, a proposal for RT-QC criteria for tumor bed boost in non-metastatic MB was developed.