An in-silico quality assurance study of contouring target volumes in thoracic tumors within a cooperative group setting
Name:
Publisher version
View Source
Access full-text PDFOpen Access
View Source
Check access options
Check access options
Authors
Elhalawani, HeshamFitzGerald, Thomas J
Laurie, Fran
Ulin, Kenneth
Decker, Roy
Thomas, Charles R. Jr.
Fuller, Clifton D.
UMass Chan Affiliations
Department of Radiation OncologyImaging and Radiation Oncology Core QA Center Rhode Island
Document Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2019-01-06Keywords
ContouringPancoast tumor
QA
Quality assurance
Target volumes
Thoracic
Neoplasms
Oncology
Radiation Medicine
Radiology
Translational Medical Research
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Introduction: Target delineation variability is a significant technical impediment in multi-institutional trials which employ intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), as there is a real potential for clinically meaningful variances that can impact the outcomes in clinical trials. The goal of this study is to determine the variability of target delineation among participants from different institutions as part of Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) Radiotherapy Committee's multi-institutional in-silico quality assurance study in patients with Pancoast tumors as a "dry run" for trial implementation. Methods: CT simulation scans were acquired from four patients with Pancoast tumor. Two patients had simulation 4D-CT and FDG-FDG PET-CT while two patients had 3D-CT and FDG-FDG PET-CT. Seventeen SWOG-affiliated physicians independently delineated target volumes defined as gross primary and nodal tumor volumes (GTV_P and GTV_N), clinical target volume (CTV), and planning target volume (PTV).Six board-certified thoracic radiation oncologists were designated as the 'Experts' for this study. Their delineations were used to create a simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) contours using ADMIRE software (Elekta AB, Sweden 2017). Individual participants' contours were then compared with Experts' STAPLE contours. Results: When compared to the Experts' STAPLE, GTV_P had the best agreement among all participants, while GTV_N showed the lowest agreement among all participants. There were no statistically significant differences in all studied parameters for all TVs for cases with 4D-CT versus cases with 3D-CT simulation scans. Conclusions: High degree of inter-observer variation was noted for all target volume except for GTV_P, unveiling potentials for protocol modification for subsequent clinically meaningful improvement in target definition. Various similarity indices exist that can be used to guide multi-institutional radiotherapy delineation QA credentialing.Source
Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2019 Jan 6;15:83-92. doi: 10.1016/j.ctro.2019.01.001. eCollection 2019 Feb. Link to article on publisher's site
DOI
10.1016/j.ctro.2019.01.001Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/40948PubMed ID
30775563Notes
Full author list omitted for brevity. For the full list of authors, see article.
Related Resources
Rights
Copyright 2019 The Authors. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).Distribution License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.ctro.2019.01.001
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Copyright 2019 The Authors. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).