Interobserver variation in postimplant computed tomography contouring affects quality assessment of prostate brachytherapy.

PURPOSE Permanent seed implants are accepted treatment of early stage prostate cancer. Implant quality is assessed by post implant CT-based dosimetry but prostate contours on CT images are obscured by metallic seed artefact and edema. Outcome depends on implant quality, but perceived implant quality depends on accurate prostate contouring. This study documents inter observer variation in prostate contouring on post implant CT scans. METHODS AND MATERIALS Ten patients had implant dosimetry calculated on 4 copies of the post implant CT scan. Prostate contours from MRI-CT fusion were the gold standard for prostate edge identification. CTs were contoured by an experienced prostate brachytherapist matching CT images to the pre implant TRUS, and by 2 GU radiation oncologists experienced in conformal radiotherapy planning. Dosimetry was compared to that obtained using MRI-CT fusion in terms of D90 and V100. RESULTS Contours and dosimetry were not reproducible among the 3 observers. The V100's of the experienced brachytherapist differed from that of MRI-CT fusion by a mean of 2.4% compared to 9.1% and 4.4% for observers 1 and 2, and the D90 by a mean of 9.3 Gy compared to 30.3 and 14.4 Gy for observers 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS Quality assessment of prostate brachytherapy based on 1 month post implant CT is difficult. This may obscure the dose-response relationship in brachytherapy as well as create problems for quality assurance in multicentre trials evaluating brachytherapy against standard modalities. Whenever possible, MRI-CT fusion should be employed to verify prostate contours post implant.

[1]  W. Butler,et al.  The dependence of prostate postimplant dosimetric quality on CT volume determination. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[2]  J J Prete,et al.  Source localization following permanent transperineal prostate interstitial brachytherapy using magnetic resonance imaging. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[3]  L. Potters Permanent prostate brachytherapy: lessons learned, lessons to learn. , 2000, Oncology.

[4]  H I Amols,et al.  A three-film technique for reconstruction of radioactive seed implants. , 1981, Medical physics.

[5]  C A Kelsey,et al.  The effect of geometric errors in the reconstruction of iridium-192 seed implants. , 1982, Medical physics.

[6]  R. Stock,et al.  A dose-response study for I-125 prostate implants. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[7]  J J Prete,et al.  Comparison of MRI- and CT-based post-implant dosimetric analysis of transperineal interstitial permanent prostate brachytherapy. , 1998, Radiation oncology investigations.

[8]  P L Roberson,et al.  Impact of differences in ultrasound and computed tomography volumes on treatment planning of permanent prostate implants. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  W. Butler,et al.  Potential role of various dosimetric quality indicators in prostate brachytherapy. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[10]  S Nag,et al.  The American Brachytherapy Society recommendations for permanent prostate brachytherapy postimplant dosimetric analysis. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  D P Dearnaley,et al.  Comparison of MRI with CT for the radiotherapy planning of prostate cancer: a feasibility study. , 1999, The British journal of radiology.

[12]  J. Blasko,et al.  Brachytherapy in patients with small prostate glands. , 2000, Techniques in urology.

[13]  GENETIC INHERITANCE AND PLASMA FIBRINOGEN , 1988, The Lancet.

[14]  K. Vigen,et al.  Tissue mimicking materials for a multi-imaging modality prostate phantom. , 2001, Medical physics.

[15]  L. Potters,et al.  A comprehensive review of CT-based dosimetry parameters and biochemical control in patients treated with permanent prostate brachytherapy. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[16]  P L Roberson,et al.  Impact of ultrasound and computed tomography prostate volume registration on evaluation of permanent prostate implants. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[17]  W Cavanagh,et al.  Comparability of CT-based and TRUS-based prostate volumes. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[18]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[19]  M. Johnston,et al.  Systematic overview of the evidence for brachytherapy in clinically localized prostate cancer. , 2001, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[20]  G E Hanks,et al.  Initial clinical assessment of CT-MRI image fusion software in localization of the prostate for 3D conformal radiation therapy. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[21]  E Bellon,et al.  The contribution of magnetic resonance imaging to the three-dimensional treatment planning of localized prostate cancer. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[22]  J J Prete,et al.  Centralized multiinstitutional postimplant analysis for interstitial prostate brachytherapy. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[23]  J J Prete,et al.  Intraobserver and interobserver variability of MR imaging- and CT-derived prostate volumes after transperineal interstitial permanent prostate brachytherapy. , 1998, Radiology.

[24]  T. Angelone,et al.  [Quantitative evaluation of blood in vivo with computed tomography]. , 1993, La Radiologia medica.

[25]  P. Grimm,et al.  American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) recommendations for transperineal permanent brachytherapy of prostate cancer. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[26]  L. Anderson,et al.  Dosimetry of interstitial brachytherapy sources: Recommendations of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 43 , 1995 .

[27]  M van Herk,et al.  Definition of the prostate in CT and MRI: a multi-observer study. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.