Evaluation of a target contouring protocol for 3D conformal radiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND A protocol for the contouring of target volumes in lung cancer was implemented. Subsequently, a study was performed in order to determine the intra and inter-clinician variations in contoured volumes. MATERIALS AND METHODS Six radiation oncologists (RO) contoured the gross tumour volume (GTV) and/or clinical target volume (CTV), and planning target volume (PTV) for three patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), on two separate occasions. These were, respectively, a well-circumscribed T1N0M0 lesion, an irregularly shaped T2N0M0 lesion, and a T2N2M0 tumour. Detailed diagnostic radiology reports were provided and contours were entered into a 3D planning system. The target volumes were calculated and beams-eye view (BEV) plots were generated to visualise differences in contouring. A software tool was used to expand the GTV and CTV in three dimensions for an automatically derived PTV. RESULTS Significant inter-RO variations in contoured target volumes were observed for all patients, and these were greater than intra-RO differences. The ratio of the largest to smallest contoured volume ranged from 1.6 for the GTV in the T1N0 lesion, to 2.0 for the PTV in the T2N2 lesion. The BEV plots revealed significant inter-RO variations in contouring the mediastinal CTV. The PTV's derived using a 3D margin programme were larger than manually contoured PTV's. These variations did not correlate with the experience of ROs. CONCLUSIONS Despite the use of an institutional contouring protocol, significant interclinician variations persist in contouring target volumes in NSCLC. Additional measures to decrease such variations should be incorporated into clinical trials.

[1]  S. McNee,et al.  An audit of 3D treatment planning facilities and practice in the UK. , 1998, Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)).

[2]  D. Altman,et al.  Statistics Notes: Measurement error and correlation coefficients , 1996, BMJ.

[3]  E van der Schueren,et al.  Quality assessment of medical decision making in radiation oncology: variability in target volume delineation for brain tumours. , 1993, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[4]  L. F. Cazzaniga,et al.  Interphysician variability in defining the planning target volume in the irradiation of prostate and seminal vesicles. , 1998, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[5]  L. Stitt,et al.  Variability of target volume delineation in cervical esophageal cancer. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  B. Heijmen,et al.  Multiple two-dimensional versus three-dimensional PTV definition in treatment planning for conformal radiotherapy. , 1998, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[7]  K M Harris,et al.  The effect on apparent size of simulated pulmonary nodules of using three standard CT window settings. , 1993, Clinical radiology.

[8]  M. Martel,et al.  Dose escalation for non-small cell lung cancer using conformal radiation therapy. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  G T Chen,et al.  Implementation of three dimensional conformal radiation therapy: prospects, opportunities, and challenges. , 1995, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[10]  R. Wahl,et al.  Preoperative staging of non-small-cell carcinoma of the lung: imaging methods. , 1995, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  C. Mountain,et al.  Regional lymph node classification for lung cancer staging. , 1997, Chest.

[12]  J Bogaert,et al.  Lymph node staging in non-small-cell lung cancer with FDG-PET scan: a prospective study on 690 lymph node stations from 68 patients. , 1998, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  J P Logue,et al.  Clinical variability of target volume description in conformal radiotherapy planning. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[14]  J. Menten,et al.  Interobserver variations in gross tumor volume delineation of brain tumors on CT and impact of MRI , 1998 .

[15]  J. Purdy,et al.  Initial experience with quality assurance of multi-institutional 3D radiotherapy clinical trials. A brief report. , 1998, Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al].

[16]  P. Philips,et al.  International survey of radiotherapy practice for radical treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. , 1994, Lung cancer.

[17]  J. Armstrong Target volume definition for three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy of lung cancer. , 1998, The British journal of radiology.

[18]  K. Hopper,et al.  Analysis of interobserver and intraobserver variability in CT tumor measurements. , 1996, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[19]  C H Ketting,et al.  Consistency of three-dimensional planning target volumes across physicians and institutions. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[20]  H S Glazer,et al.  Three-dimensional radiation treatment planning study for patients with carcinoma of the lung. , 1994, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[21]  J W Denham,et al.  Treatment and planning decisions in non-small cell carcinoma of the lung: an Australasian patterns of practice study. , 1992, Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)).

[22]  T. Landberg,et al.  What margins should be added to the clinical target volume in radiotherapy treatment planning for lung cancer? , 1998, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.