Quality assessment of medical decision making in radiation oncology: variability in target volume delineation for brain tumours.

The enormous developments in radiation technology open new horizons for improvements in local tumour control. However, the evolution from conventional external beam radiotherapy planning to conformal therapy might be hampered by the potential risk of over-reliance on the physician's capability of estimating the tumour extent from imaging modalities. The variability between 12 volunteering physicians in the delineation of tumour and target volume on the lateral orthogonal localisation radiograph from CT was assessed for 5 brain tumours. The estimated tumour and target sizes varied, respectively with a factor of 1.3-2.6 and with a factor of 1.3-2.1. The anatomical location of the volumes showed maximum variations from 11 to 27 mm in the cranio-caudal direction and from 14 to 21 mm in the fronto-occipital direction. For the 5 test cases, the tumour area on which all radiation oncologists agreed, represented only 25-73% of the corresponding mean tumour area. Although the introduction of computed tomography in radiation treatment planning was proved to be a major step forwards for treatment planning in many tumour sites, the results of the present study on brain tumours demonstrate that the subjective interpretation of the tumour extent based on CT images might be one of the largest factors contributing to the overall uncertainty in radiation treatment planning. Moreover, this study endorses the need for uncertainty analysis of the medical decision-making process. It may be that the process of making uncertainties explicit can contribute to the improvement of our present concept of radiation treatment planning.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

[1]  J. Horiot,et al.  Quality assurance control in the EORTC cooperative group of radiotherapy. 3. Intercomparison in an anatomical phantom. , 1987, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[2]  E. Van Der Schueren,et al.  Assessment of dose inhomogeneity at target level by in vivo dosimetry: can the recommended 5% accuracy in the dose delivered to the target volume be fulfilled in daily practice? , 1992, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[3]  J. Horiot,et al.  Quality assurance control in the EORTC cooperative group ofradiotherapy , 1986 .

[4]  P. Wootton,et al.  Dose Specification for Reporting External Beam Therapy with Photons and Electrons , 1979 .

[5]  L R Schad,et al.  Radiotherapy treatment planning of basal meningiomas: improved tumor localization by correlation of CT and MR imaging data. , 1992, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[6]  A. Dutreix When and how can we improve precision in radiotherapy? , 1984, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[7]  J. Horiot,et al.  Quality assurance control in the EORTC cooperative group of radiotherapy. 1. Assessment of radiotherapy staff and equipment. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer. , 1986, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[8]  J van de Geijn,et al.  The imaging revolution and radiation oncology: use of CT, ultrasound, and NMR for localization, treatment planning and treatment delivery. , 1985, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  M L Kessler,et al.  Integration of multimodality imaging data for radiotherapy treatment planning. , 1991, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[10]  R. Rubens,et al.  Quality assurance in cancer treatment , 1993 .

[11]  M Goitein,et al.  The value of CT scanning in radiation therapy treatment planning: a prospective study. , 1979, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[12]  R. P. Parker,et al.  The use of CT in radiotherapy treatment planning. , 1983, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[13]  D L McShan,et al.  The clinical utility of magnetic resonance imaging in 3-dimensional treatment planning of brain neoplasms. , 1992, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[14]  F. Eschwège,et al.  Accuracy in mantle field irradiations: irradiated volume and daily dose. , 1993, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[15]  R Mohan,et al.  The role of uncertainty analysis in treatment planning. , 1991, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[16]  T. H. Newton,et al.  Brain radiation lesions: MR imaging. , 1986, Radiology.

[17]  E. Van Der Schueren,et al.  Quality assurance in radiotherapy by in vivo dosimetry. 1. Entrance dose measurements, a reliable procedure. , 1990, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[18]  A Dutreix,et al.  Is it necessary to repeat quality control procedures for head and neck patients? , 1991, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[19]  Manual reconstruction of tumor volumes from CT scans for radiotherapy planning. , 1989, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[20]  N. Blanckaert,et al.  Are port films reliable for in vivo exit dose measurements? , 1992, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.