4DCT MIP图像与FDG PET-CT不同SUV阈值勾画NSCLC IGTV的比较研究

doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1004-4221.2014.04.011

Abstract
Figure/Table
References()
Related Citation (15)
Read Tracking
Download Tracking

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS) Supporting Info

Abstract Objective To compare the positional and volumetric differences between internal gross target volumes (IGTV) based on the maximum intensity projection (MIP) images of four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) and different standardized uptake value (SUV) thresholds of fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/CT (PET/CT) for the primary tumor of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods Ten patients with NSCLC sequentially underwent contrast-enhanced 3DCT and 4DCT, as well as FDG PET-CT (with the same body position and positional parameters). IGTV_MIP of the primary tumor was delineated on the MIP images of 4DCT. IGTV_PET2.0, IGTV_PET2.5, IGTV_PET3.0, IGTV_PET3.5, IGTV_PET20%, IGTV_PET25%, IGTV_PET30%, IGTV_PET35%, IGTV_PET40% andIGTV_PETmanwere automatically and manually delineated based on different SUV thresholds of FDG PET/CT and different percentages of SUV_max. The differences in position, volume, matching index (MI), and degree of inclusion (DI) between IGTV_PET and IGTV_MIP were evaluated by paired t-test. Results There were significant differences in center coordinate between IGTV_PET and IGTV_MIP only in z axes (P=0.014—0.044). In terms of volume, IGTV_PET2.0 and IGTV_PET20% were most similar to IGTV_MIP, with volume ratios of 1.02 and 1.06(P=0.806). The highest MI was seen between IGTV_MIP and IGTV_PET2.0 and between IGTV_MIP and IGTV_PET20%(0.46 and 0.45, P=0.603). The DI of IGTV_PET20% or IGTV_PET2.0 in IGTV_MIP was the highest (0.61 or 0.61, P=0.963). Conclusions IGTV_PET2.0 and IGTV_PET20% are most similar to IGTV_MIP in terms of volume and matching index, but neither of them could replace IGTV_MIP in spatial position. When the IGTV of the primary tumor of NSCLC is delineated based on PET-CT, target position correction should be done with reference to 4DCT images while selecting the suitable SUV threshold.

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	Duan Yili
	Li Jianbin
	Zhang Yingjie
	Wang Wei
	Fan Tingyong
	Shao Qian
	Xu Min
	Guo Yanluan
	Shang Dongping
	Fu Zheng

Key words： Tomography, positron-emission, fluorodeoxyglucose Tomography, X-ray computed, four-dimensional Maximum intensity projection Internal gross target volume Lung neoplasms/radiotherapy

Received: 25 November 2013

Corresponding Authors: Li Jianbin, Email:lijianbin@msn.com

Cite this article:

Duan Yili,Li Jianbin,Zhang Yingjie et al. Comparison of internal gross tumor volumes delineated based on MIP images of 4DCT and different SUV thresholds of FDG PET/CT for non-small cell lung cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology, 2014, 23(4): 317-321.

URL:

http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jweb_fszlx/EN/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1004-4221.2014.04.011 OR http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jweb_fszlx/EN/Y2014/V23/I4/317

[1] Underberg RW, Lagerwaard FJ, Slotman BJ, et al. Use of maximum intensity projections (MIP) for target volume generation in 4DCT scans for lung cancer[J].Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2005,63:253-260.
[2] Greco C, Rosenzweig K, Cascini GL, et al. Current status of PET/CT for tumor volume definition in radiotherapy treatment planning for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)[J].Lung Cancer,2007,57:125-134.
[3] Okubo M, Nishimura Y, Nakamatsu K, et al. Static and moving phantom studies for radiation treatment planning in a position emission tomography and computed tomography (PET/CT) system[J].Ann Nucl Med,2008,22:579-586.
[4] Hanna GG, McAleese J, Carson KJ, et al.(18) F-FDG PET-CT simulation for non-small cell lung cancer:what is the impact in patients already staged by PET-CT[J]? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2010,77:24-30.
[5] Hof H, Rhern B, Haering P, et al.4D-CT-based target volume definition in stereotactic radiotherapy of lung tumors:comparison with a conventional technique using individual margins[J].Radiother Oncol,2009,93:419-423.
[6] Ezhil M, Vedam S, Balter P, et al. Determination of patient-specific internal gross tumor volumes for lung cancer using four-dimensional computed tomography[J]. Radiat Oncol,2009,4:4-10.
[7] Muirhead R, McNee SG, Featherstone C, et al. Use of maximum intensity projections (MIPs) for target outlining in 4DCT radiotherapy planning[J]. J Thorac Oncol,2008,3:1433-1438.
[8] Rietzel E, Liu AK, Chen GT, et al. Maximum-intensity volumes for fast contouring of lung tumors including respiratory motion in 4DCT planning[J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2008,71:1245-1252.
[9] Caldwell CB, Mah K, Ung YC, et al. Observer variation in contouring gross tumor volume in patients with poorly-defined non-small cell lung tumors on CT:the impact of ¹⁸FDG-Hybrid PET fusion[J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2001,51:923-931.
[10] Hanna GG, van Somsen de Koste JR, Dahele MR, et al. Defining target volumes for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy of early-stage lung tumors:a comparison of three dimensional (18) F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and four-dimensional computed tomography[J]. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol),2012,24:71-80.
[11] Caldwell CB, Mah K, Skinner M, et al. Can PET provide the 3D extent of tumor motion for individualized internal target volumes? A phantom study of the limitations of CT and the promise of PET[J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2003,55:1381-1393.
[12] Biehl KJ, Kong FM, Dehdashti F, et al. ¹⁸F-FDG PET definition of gross tumor volume for radiotherapy of non-small cell lung cancer:is a single standardized uptake value threshold approach appropriate[J]? J Nucl Med,2006,47:1808-1812.
[13] Callahan J, Kron T, Schneider-Kolsky M, et al. Validation of a 4D-PET maximum intensity projection for delineation of an internal target volume[J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2013,86:749-754.
[14] Lamb JM, Robinson C, Bradley J, et al. Generating lung tumor internal target volume from 4D-PET maximum intensity projections[J]. Med Phys,2011,38:5732-5737.