FDG PET/CT for rectal carcinoma radiotherapy treatment planning: comparison of functional volume delineation algorithms and clinical challenges

PET/CT imaging could improve delineation of rectal carcinoma gross tumor volume (GTV) and reduce interobserver variability. The objective of this work was to compare various functional volume delineation algorithms. We enrolled 31 consecutive patients with locally advanced rectal carcinoma. The FDG PET/CT and the high dose CT (CTRT) were performed in the radiation treatment position. For each patient, the anatomical GTVRT was delineated based on the CTRT and compared to six different functional/metabolic GTVPET derived from two automatic segmentation approaches (FLAB and a gradient‐based method); a relative threshold (45% of the SUVmax) and an absolute threshold (SUV>2.5), using two different commercially available software (Philips EBW4 and Segami OASIS). The spatial sizes and shapes of all volumes were compared using the conformity index (CI). All the delineated metabolic tumor volumes (MTVs) were significantly different. The MTVs were as follows (mean±SD):GTVRT(40.6±31.28ml); FLAB(21.36±16.34ml); the gradient‐based method (18.97±16.83ml); OASIS45%(15.89±12.68ml); Philips45%(14.52±10.91ml); OASIS2.5(41.62±33.26ml); Philips2.5(40±31.27ml). CI between these various volumes ranged from 0.40 to 0.90. The mean CI between the different MTVs and the GTVCT was <0.4. Finally, the DICOM transfer of MTVs led to additional volume variations. In conclusion, we observed large and statistically significant variations in tumor volume delineation according to the segmentation algorithms and the software products. The manipulation of PET/CT images and MTVs, such as the DICOM transfer to the Radiation Oncology Department, induced additional volume variations. PACS number: 87.55.D‐

[1]  Dimitris Visvikis,et al.  PET functional volume delineation: a robustness and repeatability study , 2011, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[2]  C. Rübe,et al.  Comparison of different methods for delineation of 18F-FDG PET-positive tissue for target volume definition in radiotherapy of patients with non-Small cell lung cancer. , 2005, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[3]  C. Compton,et al.  AJCC Cancer Staging Manual , 2002, Springer New York.

[4]  A. Debucquoy,et al.  The ESTRO Breur Lecture 2010: toward a tailored patient approach in rectal cancer. , 2011, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[5]  Ronald Boellaard,et al.  Impact of [18F]FDG PET imaging parameters on automatic tumour delineation: need for improved tumour delineation methodology , 2011, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[6]  R. Coleman,et al.  Recommendations on the Use of 18F-FDG PET in Oncology , 2008, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[7]  Miguel Pagola,et al.  Twelve automated thresholding methods for segmentation of PET images: a phantom study. , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  Tim Fox,et al.  PET-CT fusion in radiation management of patients with anorectal tumors. , 2007, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  Karin Haustermans,et al.  Definition and delineation of the clinical target volume for rectal cancer. , 2006, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[10]  Philippe Lambin,et al.  FDG-PET-CT reduces the interobserver variability in rectal tumor delineation. , 2012, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[11]  K. Jingu,et al.  Focal dose escalation using FDG-PET-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy boost for postoperative local recurrent rectal cancer: a planning study with comparison of DVH and NTCP , 2010, BMC Cancer.

[12]  G Loi,et al.  Threshold segmentation for PET target volume delineation in radiation treatment planning: the role of target-to-background ratio and target size. , 2008, Medical physics.

[13]  O. Govaere,et al.  Molecular markers associated with outcome and metastasis in human pancreatic cancer , 2012, Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR.

[14]  Dimitris Visvikis,et al.  Impact of Tumor Size and Tracer Uptake Heterogeneity in 18F-FDG PET and CT Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Tumor Delineation , 2011, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[15]  Dimitris Visvikis,et al.  Early prediction of pathological response in locally advanced rectal cancer based on sequential 18F-FDG PET , 2013, Acta oncologica.

[16]  Anne Bol,et al.  Tri-dimensional automatic segmentation of PET volumes based on measured source-to-background ratios: influence of reconstruction algorithms. , 2003, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[17]  Luca Vigna,et al.  Influence of reconstruction settings on the performance of adaptive thresholding algorithms for FDG‐PET image segmentation in radiotherapy planning , 2011, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[18]  V. Grégoire,et al.  Gradient-based delineation of the primary GTV on FDG-PET in non-small cell lung cancer: a comparison with threshold-based approaches, CT and surgical specimens. , 2011, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[19]  D. Treanor,et al.  Pathological response following long‐course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer , 2005, Histopathology.

[20]  Sasa Mutic,et al.  18F-FDG PET definition of gross tumor volume for radiotherapy of non-small cell lung cancer: is a single standardized uptake value threshold approach appropriate? , 2006, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[21]  M. Miften,et al.  A region growing method for tumor volume segmentation on PET images for rectal and anal cancer patients. , 2009, Medical physics.

[22]  M. Sim,et al.  AJCC Cancer Staging Manual 7th edition criteria for colon cancer: do the complex modifications improve prognostic assessment? , 2013, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[23]  Kristin D. Brockway,et al.  What is the best way to contour lung tumors on PET scans? Multiobserver validation of a gradient-based method using a NSCLC digital PET phantom. , 2012, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[24]  J. Tonn,et al.  FET-PET for malignant glioma treatment planning. , 2011, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[25]  Anne Bol,et al.  A gradient-based method for segmenting FDG-PET images: methodology and validation , 2007, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[26]  Philippe Lambin,et al.  FDG-PET provides the best correlation with the tumor specimen compared to MRI and CT in rectal cancer. , 2011, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[27]  M. Brambilla,et al.  Target Volume Delineation for Preoperative Radiotherapy of Rectal Cancer: Inter-Observer Variability and Potential Impact of FDG-PET/CT Imaging , 2010, Technology in cancer research & treatment.

[28]  Marco Brambilla,et al.  FDG-PET/CT imaging for staging and target volume delineation in preoperative conformal radiotherapy of rectal cancer. , 2008, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[29]  Christian Roux,et al.  A Fuzzy Locally Adaptive Bayesian Segmentation Approach for Volume Determination in PET , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[30]  R. Summers Polyp size measurement at CT colonography: what do we know and what do we need to know? , 2010, Radiology.

[31]  A. Scott,et al.  Prognostic Ability of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the Assessment of Colorectal Liver Metastases , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[32]  L. Boersma,et al.  Analysis of the relative deformation of lung lobes before and after surgery in patients with NSCLC , 2009, Physics in medicine and biology.