Evaluation of gross target volumes in CECT vs MRI in head and neck cancer and its implication on concordance indices and dose-volume parameters of IMRT treatment plan.

Milind Deshmukh, Bharati M Jain, Ashok Singh, Pallavi Kalbande, Atul Tayade, Niloy R Datta
{"title":"Evaluation of gross target volumes in CECT vs MRI in head and neck cancer and its implication on concordance indices and dose-volume parameters of IMRT treatment plan.","authors":"Milind Deshmukh, Bharati M Jain, Ashok Singh, Pallavi Kalbande, Atul Tayade, Niloy R Datta","doi":"10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_246_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although radiotherapy treatment planning (RTP) for head and neck cancers (HNCs) is based on contrast enhanced computed tomography (CECT), soft tissue contrasts are better evident on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We therefore evaluated dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters along with concordance index (ConI), conformity index (CI), and homogeneity index (HI) of planning target volume (PTV) of GTV delineated on CECT vs MRI in HNCs enrolled for intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>Forty consecutive HNCs were enrolled in this study. All underwent CECT and MRI simulations with immobilization devices. GTVp and GTVn were delineated independently on CECT and MRI images. Corresponding MRI volumes were then copied to CECT. IMRT plans were generated on the CECT incorporating PTV margins. DVH parameters of PTVpn for both CECT and MRI were compared. In addition, mean (±SD) percentage difference of GTVp, GTVn, GTVpn, ConI, CI, and HI were evaluated using paired t-test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The GTVp (P = 0.005), GTVn (P = 0.009), and GTVpn (P < 0.001) delineated on MRI were found to be significantly larger than GTV delineated on CECT. In eight patients, GTV outlined on CECT were larger than MRI. Significant mean differences in CECT vs MRI of CI (P < 0.001), HI (P < 0.001), ConI (P < 0.001), and DVH parameters (D2, D95, D98, V95, and V100 all P < 0.001; D50: P = 0.009) were noted.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The GTVs and corresponding PTVs were significantly larger on MRI compared to CECT. This resulted in significant differences in DVH parameters, CI, ConI, and HI. This could be improved by co-registered MRI-CECT volumes during routine IMRT treatment planning for HNCs.</p>","PeriodicalId":94070,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cancer research and therapeutics","volume":"20 5","pages":"1533-1538"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cancer research and therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_246_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Although radiotherapy treatment planning (RTP) for head and neck cancers (HNCs) is based on contrast enhanced computed tomography (CECT), soft tissue contrasts are better evident on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We therefore evaluated dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters along with concordance index (ConI), conformity index (CI), and homogeneity index (HI) of planning target volume (PTV) of GTV delineated on CECT vs MRI in HNCs enrolled for intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

Methodology: Forty consecutive HNCs were enrolled in this study. All underwent CECT and MRI simulations with immobilization devices. GTVp and GTVn were delineated independently on CECT and MRI images. Corresponding MRI volumes were then copied to CECT. IMRT plans were generated on the CECT incorporating PTV margins. DVH parameters of PTVpn for both CECT and MRI were compared. In addition, mean (±SD) percentage difference of GTVp, GTVn, GTVpn, ConI, CI, and HI were evaluated using paired t-test.

Results: The GTVp (P = 0.005), GTVn (P = 0.009), and GTVpn (P < 0.001) delineated on MRI were found to be significantly larger than GTV delineated on CECT. In eight patients, GTV outlined on CECT were larger than MRI. Significant mean differences in CECT vs MRI of CI (P < 0.001), HI (P < 0.001), ConI (P < 0.001), and DVH parameters (D2, D95, D98, V95, and V100 all P < 0.001; D50: P = 0.009) were noted.

Conclusion: The GTVs and corresponding PTVs were significantly larger on MRI compared to CECT. This resulted in significant differences in DVH parameters, CI, ConI, and HI. This could be improved by co-registered MRI-CECT volumes during routine IMRT treatment planning for HNCs.

评估头颈部癌症 CECT 与 MRI 的总靶体积及其对 IMRT 治疗计划的一致性指数和剂量-体积参数的影响。
背景:尽管头颈部癌症(HNC)的放疗治疗计划(RTP)是基于对比增强计算机断层扫描(CECT),但软组织对比在磁共振成像(MRI)上更为明显。因此,我们对接受调强放射治疗(IMRT)的 HNC 患者进行了剂量-容积直方图(DVH)参数以及 CECT 与 MRI 划分的 GTV 计划靶体积(PTV)的一致性指数(ConI)、顺应性指数(CI)和均匀性指数(HI)的评估:本研究共纳入 40 例连续的 HNC。所有患者都接受了带有固定装置的 CECT 和 MRI 模拟检查。CECT和MRI图像上的GTVp和GTVn是独立划定的。然后将相应的 MRI 容量复制到 CECT 上。在 CECT 上生成 IMRT 计划,其中包括 PTV 边缘。比较了CECT和MRI的PTVpn的DVH参数。此外,还使用配对 t 检验评估了 GTVp、GTVn、GTVpn、ConI、CI 和 HI 的平均(±SD)百分比差异:结果:MRI 上划定的 GTVp(P = 0.005)、GTVn(P = 0.009)和 GTVpn(P < 0.001)明显大于 CECT 上划定的 GTV。在8例患者中,CECT显示的GTV大于MRI显示的GTV。CECT与MRI的CI(P<0.001)、HI(P<0.001)、ConI(P<0.001)和DVH参数(D2、D95、D98、V95和V100均P<0.001;D50:P = 0.009)的平均值差异显著:结论:与CECT相比,MRI上的GTV和相应的PTV明显更大。结论:与 CECT 相比,MRI 上的 GTV 和相应的 PTV 明显更大,这导致了 DVH 参数、CI、ConI 和 HI 的显著差异。在对HNCs进行常规IMRT治疗规划时,可通过联合登记MRI-CECT容积来改善这一情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信