The effect of contouring variability on dosimetric parameters for brain metastases treated with stereotactic radiosurgery.

PURPOSE To quantify the effect of contouring variation on stereotactic radiosurgery plan quality metrics for brain metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS Fourteen metastases, each contoured by 8 physicians, formed the basis of this study. A template-based dynamic conformal 5-arc dose distribution was developed for each of the 112 contours, and each dose distribution was applied to the 7 other contours in each patient set. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) plan quality metrics and the Paddick conformity index were calculated for each of the 896 combinations of dose distributions and contours. RESULTS The ratio of largest to smallest contour volume for each metastasis varied from 1.25 to 4.47, with a median value of 1.68 (n=8). The median absolute difference in RTOG conformity index between the value for the reference contour and the values for the alternative contours was 0.35. The variation of the range of conformity index for all contours for a given tumor varied with the tumor size. CONCLUSIONS The high degree of interobserver contouring variation strongly suggests that peer review or consultation should be adopted to standardize tumor volume prescription. Observer confidence was not reflected in contouring consistency. The impact of contouring variability on plan quality metrics, used as criteria for clinical trial protocol compliance, was such that the category of compliance was robust to interobserver effects only 70% of the time.

[1]  Frederik Barkhof,et al.  Stereotactic radiosurgery for brain AVMs: role of interobserver variation in target definition on digital subtraction angiography. , 2005, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[2]  Seong-Hyun Park,et al.  Factors related to the local treatment failure of gamma knife surgery for metastatic brain tumors , 2010, Acta Neurochirurgica.

[3]  J. Albert,et al.  Quality indicators in radiation oncology. , 2013, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  K Okajima,et al.  Differences in target outline delineation from CT scans of brain tumours using different methods and different observers. , 1999, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[5]  Michael G Jameson,et al.  A review of methods of analysis in contouring studies for radiation oncology , 2010, Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology.

[6]  Peter Dunscombe,et al.  Evaluation of stereotactic radiosurgery conformity indices for 170 target volumes in patients with brain metastases , 2011, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[7]  L Souhami,et al.  Radiation Therapy Oncology Group: radiosurgery quality assurance guidelines. , 1993, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[8]  E Bellon,et al.  Interobserver variations in gross tumor volume delineation of brain tumors on computed tomography and impact of magnetic resonance imaging. , 2001, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[9]  M. V. van Herk,et al.  Irradiation of paranasal sinus tumors, a delineation and dose comparison study. , 2002, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[10]  I. Paddick,et al.  A simple scoring ratio to index the conformity of radiosurgical treatment plans , 2001 .

[11]  I. Paddick A simple scoring ratio to index the conformity of radiosurgical treatment plans. Technical note. , 2000, Journal of neurosurgery.

[12]  A R Hounsell,et al.  Geometrical analysis of radiotherapy target volume delineation: a systematic review of reported comparison methods. , 2010, Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)).