Radiotherapy & Oncology
Volume 89, Issue 2 , Pages 164-171 , November 2008

Inter- and intraobserver variation in HR-CTV contouring: Intercomparison of transverse and paratransverse image orientation in 3D-MRI assisted cervix cancer brachytherapy

  • Primoz Petric

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiotherapy and Radiobiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
    • Department of Radiotherapy, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
    • ,
  • Johannes Dimopoulos

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiotherapy and Radiobiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Johannes Dimopoulos, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiobiology, Medical University of Vienna, General Hospital of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.
    • ,
  • Christian Kirisits

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiotherapy and Radiobiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
    • ,
  • Daniel Berger

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiotherapy and Radiobiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
    • ,
  • Robert Hudej

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiotherapy and Radiobiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
    • Department of Radiotherapy, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
    • ,
  • Richard Pötter

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiotherapy and Radiobiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Received 7 October 2007 ,Revised 14 July 2008 ,Accepted 20 July 2008.

References 

  1. Haie-Meder C, Pötter R, Van Limbergen E, et al. Recommendations from Gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO Working Group (I): concepts and terms in 3D image based 3D treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy with emphasis on MRI assessment of GTV and CTV. Radiother Oncol. 2005;74:235–245
  2. Green JA, Kirwan JM, Tierney JF, et al. Survival and recurrence after concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer of the uterine cervix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2001;8:781–786
  3. Morris M, Eifel PJ, Lu J, Grigsby PW, Levenback C, Stevens RE, et al. Pelvic radiation with concurrent chemotherapy compared with pelvic and para-aortic radiation for high-risk cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999;40:1137–1143
  4. Whitney CW, Sause W, Bundy BN, Malfetano JH, Hannigan EV, Fowler WC, et al. Randomized comparison of fluorouracil plus cisplatin versus hydroxyurea as an adjunct to radiation therapy in stage IIB-IVA carcinoma of the cervix with negative para-aortic lymph nodes: a Gynecologic Oncology Group and Southwest Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:1339–1348
  5. Rose PG, Bundy BN, Watkins EB, Thigpen JT, Deppe G, Maiman MA, et al. Concurrent cisplatin-based radiotherapy and chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:1144–1153
  6. Pötter R, Dimopoulos J, Bachtiary B, et al. 3D conformal HDR brachy- and external beam therapy plus simultaneous Cisplatin for high-risk cervical cancer: clinical experience with 3 year follow-up. Radiother Oncol. 2006;79:80–86
  7. Wachter-Gerstner N, Wachter S, Reinstadler E, et al. The impact of sectional imaging on dose escalation in endocavitary HDR-brachytherapy of cervical cancer: results of a prospective comparative trial. Radiother Oncol. 2003;68:51–59
  8. Wachter-Gerstner N, Wachter S, Reinstadler E, et al. Bladder and rectum dose defined from MRI based treatment planning for cervix cancer brachytherapy: comparison of dose-volume histograms for organ contours and organ wall, comparison with ICRU rectum and bladder reference point. Radiother Oncol. 2003;68:269–276
  9. Kirisits C, Pötter R, Lang S, et al. Dose and volume parameters for MRI based treatment planning in intracavitary brachytherapy of cervix cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;62:901–911
  10. Lindegaard JC, Tanderup K, Nielsen SK, Haack S, Gelineck J. MRI-guided 3D optimization significantly improves DVH parameters of pulsed-dose-rate brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;71:756–764
  11. De Brabandere M, Mousa AG, Nulens A, Swinnen A, Van Limbergen E. Potential of dose optimisation in MRI-based PDR brachytherapy of cervix carcinoma. Radiother Oncol. 2008;88:217–226
  12. Dimopoulos JCA, Schard G, Berger D, et al. Systematic evaluation of MRI findings in different stages of treatment of cervical cancer: potential of MRI on delineation of target, patho-anatomical structures and organs at risk. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64:1380–1388
  13. Shin K, Kim T, Cho J, et al. CT-guided intracavitary radiotherapy for cervical cancer: comparison of conventional point A plan with clinical target volume-based 3-dimensional plan using dose-volume parameters. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64:197–204
  14. Brooks S, Bownes P, Lowe G, Bryant L, Hoskin PJ. Cervical brachytherapy utilizing ring applicator: comparison of standard and conformal loading. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;63:934–939
  15. Chajon E, Dumas I, Touleimat M, et al. Inverse planning approach for 3-D MRI-based pulse-dose rate intracavitary brachytherapy in cervix cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;69:955–961
  16. Kim RY, Pareek P. Radiography-based treatment planning compared with computed tomography (CT)-based treatment planning for intracavitary brachytherapy in cancer of the cervix: analysis of dose-volume histograms. Brachytherapy. 2003;2:200–206
  17. Pelloski CE, Palmer M, Chronowski GM, Jhingran A, Horton J, Eifel PJ. Comparison between CT-based volumetric calculations and ICRU reference-point estimates of radiation doses delivered to bladder and rectum during intracavitary radiotherapy for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;62:131–137
  18. Kirisits C, Lang S, Dimopoulos J, et al. The Vienna applicator for combined intracavitary and interstitial brachytherapy of cervical cancer: design, application, treatment planning, and dosimetric results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65:624–630
  19. Dimopoulos JCA, Kirisits C, Petric P, et al. The Vienna applicator for combined intracavitary and interstitial brachytherapy of cervical cancer: clinical feasibility and preliminary results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;66:83–90
  20. Pötter R, Haie-Mader C, Van Limbergen E, et al. Recommendations from gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO Working Group: (II): concepts and terms of 3D imaging, radiation physics, radiobiology, and 3D dose volume parameters. Radiother Oncol. 2006;78:67–77
  21. Viswanathan AN, Dimopoulos JCA, Kirisits C, et al. CT versus MRI-based contouring in cervical cancer brachytherapy: results of a prospective trial and preliminary guidelines for standardized contours. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68:491–498
  22. Pötter R, Dimopoulos J, Georg P, et al. Clinical impact of MRI assisted dose volume adaptation and dose escalation in brachytherapy of locally advanced cervix cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2007;83:148–155
  23. Saarnak AE, Boersma M, Van Bunnigen BNFM, et al. Inter-observer variation in delineation of bladder and rectum contours for brachytherapy of cervical cancer. Radiother Onclo. 2000;56:37–42
  24. Wu DH, Mayr NA, Karatas Y, et al. Interobserver variation in cervical cancer tumour delineation for image based radiotherapy planning among and within different specialties. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2005;6:106–110
  25. Weiss E, Richter S, Krauss T, et al. Conformal radiotherapy planning of cervix carcinoma: differences in the delineation of target volume. A comparison between gynaecologic and radiation oncologists. Radiother Oncol. 2003;67:87–95
  26. Weltens C, Menten J, Feron M, et al. Interobserver variation in gross tumor volume delineation of brain tumors on computed tomography and impact of magnetic resonance imaging. Radiother Oncol. 2001;60:49–59
  27. Khoo V, Adams EJ, Saran F, et al. A comparison of clinical target volumes determined by CT and MRI for the radiotherapy planning of base of skull meningiomas. Int J Radit Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;46:1309–1317
  28. Rasch C, Barillot I, Remeijer P, et al. Definition of the prostate in CT and MRI: a multiobserver study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;43:57–66
  29. Struikmans H, Warlam-Rodenhuis C, Stam T. Interobserver variability of clinical target volume delineation of glandular breast tissue and of boost volume in tangential breast irradiation. Radiother Oncol. 2005;76:293–299
  30. Hurkmans CW, Borger JH, Pieters BR, et al. Variability in target volume delineation on CT scans of the breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;50:1366–1372
  31. Steenbakers RJHM, Duppen JC, Fitton I, et al. Observer variation in target volume delineation of lung cancer related to radiation oncologist–computer interaction: a big brother evaluation. Radiother Oncol. 2005;77:182–190
  32. Steenbakers RJHM, Duppen JC, Fitton I, et al. Reduction of observer variation using matched CT-PET for lung cancer delineation: a three dimensional analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64:435–448
  33. Lang S, Nulens A, Briot E, et al. Intercomparison of treatment concepts for MR image assisted brachytherapy of cervical carcinoma based on GYN GEC-ESTRO recommendations. Radiother Oncol. 2006;78:185–193
  34. Nulens A, Lang S, Briot E, et al. Evaluation of contouring concepts and dose volume parameters of MR based brachytherapy treatment plans for cervix cancer: results and conclusions of the GEC-ESTRO GYN working group delineation workshops. In: GEC-ESTRO meeting, Budapest; 2005. Radiother Oncol 2005;75:S9.
  35. Dimopoulos JCA, De Vos V, Berger D, et al. Interobserver comparison of target delineation in MRI based cervix cancer brachytherapy according to the GYN GEC-ESTRO recommendations. In: GEC-ESTRO-ISIORT Europe joint meeting, Montpellier; 2007. Radiother Oncol 2007;83:18–9.
  36. Shiraiwa M, Joja I, et al. Cervical carcinoma: efficacy of thin-section oblique axial T2-weighted images for evaluating parametrial invasion. Abdominal Imaging. 1999;24:514–519
  37. Murakami T, Kurachi H, Nakamura H, et al. Cervical invasion of endometrial carcinoma evaluation by parasagittal MR imaging. Acta Radiol. 1995;36:248–253
  38. Joja I, Asakawa T, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of endometrial carcinoma with turbo-FLASH technique. JCAT. 1994;20:878–887
  39. Gerbaulet A, Pötter R, Haie-Meder C. Cervix cancer. In:  Gerbaulet A,  Pötter R,  Mazeron JJ,  Meertens H,  Van Limbergen E editor. The GEC ESTRO handbook of brachytherapy. Brussels: European Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology; 2002;p. 300–363
  40. Lee R, Roach M, Michalski J, et al. Interobserver variability leads to significant differences in quantifiers of prostate implant adequacy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;54:457–461
  41. Boss EA, Barentsz JO, Masuger LFAG, Boonstra H. The role of MR imaging in cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2000;10:256–270
  42. Hricak H, Lacey CG, Sandles LG, et al. Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings. Radiology. 1988;166:623–631
  43. Kirisits C, Siebert FA, Baltas D, et al. Accuracy of volume and DVH parameters determined with different brachytherapy treatment planning systems. Radiother Oncol. 2007;84:290–297

PII: S0167-8140(08)00392-7

doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2008.07.030

Radiotherapy & Oncology
Volume 89, Issue 2 , Pages 164-171 , November 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution