Utility of PET-CT on radiotherapy planning of head and neck cancer. Our initial experience

Abstract

Objective

To describe the methods used for the incorporation of FDG-PET-CT on radiotherapy planning of patients with head and neck cancer and also to evaluate the impact of FDG-PET-CT on staging and tumor volume definition.

Material and methods

A prospective study in which 20 patients with head and neck tumor submitted for radiotherapy treatment were included. All underwent a whole body PET- CT (GE DSTE 16) for staging and restaging, also acquiring an additional 3 h delayed PET image with diagnostic CT parameters for planning. A CT scan with diagnostic protocol, tabletop available for radiotherapy treatment and the same personalized head-shoulder mask were used in the latter. Lymph node involvement and/or distant involvement were evaluated, considering the changes in staging. We also evaluated the differences in volumes obtained between the different techniques. The threshold value used for delineating PET gross tumor volume (GTV) was empirically established and ranged from 20–40% of the maximum SUV.

Results

Radiotherapy planning was performed with PET-CT in 20 patients between October 2007 to September 2008. A total of 29 lesions (18 primary lesions because 2 patients were excluded as no tumor was observed on the PET CT images, and 11 nodes). The most frequent location was oropharynx (5 patients). Mean maxSUV of the 29 lesions was 14.4 (range 5.0 and 26.4). No statistically significant differences were found between the GTV PET and CT GTV (mean 21.9 cm³ and 19.3 cm³, respectively). PET-CT modified the staging in 20% of the patients, with a diagnostic and therapeutic impact of 50 and 25%, respectively.

Conclusion

The incorporation of PET-CT in routine radiotherapy planning is a promising technique that requires close collaboration between the nuclear medicine and radiotherapy oncology departments. PET-CT achieves better staging in patients and has a significant diagnostic and therapeutic impact. The use of the hybrid technique avoids problems arising from co-registry as well as a second examination for planning with the consequent advantage for the patient. Nonetheless, more prospective and randomized studies with pathology specimens are needed to evaluate the real impact in the tumor volume definition.