Top

Journal of Radiation Oncology

Published in:

01-06-2018 | Original Research

Comparison between CT- and MRI-derived head and neck cancer target volumes using an integrated MRI-tri-⁶⁰Co teletherapy device

Authors: Allen M. Chen, Govind Raghavan, Minsong Cao, Argin G. Mikaielian, Ali R. Sepahdari

Published in: Journal of Radiation Oncology | Issue 2/2018

Abstract

Purpose

Radiation treatment planning is typically based on the identification of a gross tumor volume (GTV) using computed tomography (CT). The clinical implementation of an integrated MRI-radiation therapy delivery unit allows for a strict comparison of CT- and MRI-derived GTVs for head and neck cancer.

Materials and methods

Twenty-six consecutive patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck were selected and planned for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) on a novel tri-⁶⁰Co teletherapy system equipped with a 0.35 T MRI (ViewRay Incorporated, Oakwood Village, OH). All patients had measurable disease. Pre-treatment MRIs were imported into a contouring interface where the primary GTV were assessed and compared to those obtained from a registered CT with the patient in the identical position and immobilization apparatus.

Results

The median GTV as derived from the CT and MRI was 27.2 cm³ (range 3.8 to 155.0 cm³) and 34.9 cm³ (range, 5.0 to 189.5 cm³), respectively (p = 0.01). The MRI-derived GTV was larger than the CT-derived GTV in 21 of the 26 cases and was smaller in the remaining 5 cases. Among the 21 cases where the MRI-derived GTV was larger, the median difference in absolute GTV per individual patient was 6.9 cm³ (range 2.1 to 33.4 cm³), representing a 25% difference on average. The median concordance index for patients with de novo versus recurrent disease was 0.83 and 0.66, respectively (p = 0.03).

Conclusion

Significant differences in GTV extent were noted between MRI- and CT-derived ViewRay images. The implications for treatment planning are discussed.

Wardman K, Prestwich RJ, Gooding MJ et al (2016) The feasibility of atlas-based automatic segmentation of MRI for head and neck radiotherapy planning. J Appl Clin Med Phys 17:6051CrossRef

Van Dijke CF, van Waes PF (1992) Head and neck tumors, MRI versus CT: a technology assessment pilot study. Eur J Radiol 14(3):235–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0720-048X(92)90094-P CrossRefPubMed

Emami B, Sethi A, Petruzzelli GJ (2003) Influence of MRI on target volume delineation and IMRT planning in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 57(2):481–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(03)00570-4 CrossRefPubMed

Rasch C, Keus R, Pameijer FA, Koops W, de Ru V, Muller S, Touw A, Bartelink H, van Herk M, Lebesque JV (1997) The potential impact of CT-MRI matching on tumor volume delineation in advanced head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 39(4):841–848. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(97)00465-3 CrossRefPubMed

Thiagaragan A, Caria N, Schoder H et al (2012) Target volume delineation in oropharyngeal cancer: impact of PET, MRI, and physical examination. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 83(1):220–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.05.060 CrossRef

Ahmed M, Schmidt M, Sohaib A, Kong C, Burke K, Richardson C, Usher M, Brennan S, Riddell A, Davies M, Newbold K, Harrington KJ, Nutting CM (2010) The value of magnetic resonance imaging in target volume delineation of base of tongue tumors—a study using flexible surface coils. Radiother Oncol 94(2):161–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2009.12.021 CrossRefPubMed

Hanvey S, McJury M, Tho LM, Glegg M, Thomson M, Grose D, James A, Rizwanullah M, Paterson C, Foster J (2013) The influence of MRI scan position on patients with oropharyngeal cancer undergoing radical radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol 8(1):129. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-129 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Cannon DM, Lee NY (2008) Recurrence in region of spared parotid gland after definitive intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 70(3):660–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.09.018 CrossRefPubMed

Seitz O, Chambron-Pinho N, Middendorp M, Sader R, Mack M, Vogl TJ, Bisdas S (2009) 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/CT to evaluate tumor, nodal disease, and gross tumor volume of oropharyngeal and oral cavity cancer: comparison with MR imaging and validation with surgical specimen. Neuroradiology 51(10):677–686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-009-0586-8 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Liao XB, Mao YP, Liu LZ et al (2008) How does magnetic resonance imaging influence staging according to AJCC staging system fornasopharyngeal carcinoma compared with computed tomography? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 72:1268–1277CrossRef

11.

Chung NN, Ting LL, Hsu WC, Lui LT, Wang PM (2004) Impact of magnetic resonance imaging versus CT on nasopharyngeal carcinoma: primary tumor target delineation for radiotherapy. Head Neck 26(3):241–246. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.10378 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Bolzoni A, Cappiello J, Piazza C, Peretti G, Maroldi R, Farina D, Nicolai P (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of mandibular involvement in oral-oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective study. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 130(7):837–843. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.130.7.837 CrossRefPubMed

13.

Banko B, Dukic V, Milovanovic J et al (2011) Diagnostic significance of magnetic resonance imaging in preoperative evaluation of patients with laryngeal tumors. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 268(11):1617–1623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-011-1701-0 CrossRefPubMed

14.

Loevner LA, Yousem DM, Montone KT, Weber R, Chalian AA, Weinstein GS (1997) Can radiologist accurately predict preepiglottic space invasion with MR imaging? AJR Am J Roentgenol 169(6):1681–1687. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.169.6.9393190 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Park JO, Jung SL, Joo YH, Jung CK, Cho KJ, Kim MS (2011) Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the assessment of tumor invasion depth in oral/oropharyngeal cancer. Oral Oncol 47(5):381–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oraloncology.2011.03.012 CrossRefPubMed

16.

Van der Hoorn A, van Laar PJ, Holtman GA, Westerlann HE (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging techniques for treatment response evaluation in patients with head and neck tumors, a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 12(5):e0177986. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177986 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Weygand J, Fuller CD, Ibbott GS, Mohamed ASR, Ding Y, Yang J, Hwang KP, Wang J (2016) Spatial precision in magnetic resonance imaging-guided radiation therapy: the role of geometric distortion. Int J Radiat Oncolo Biol Phys 95(4):1304–1316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.02.059 CrossRef

18.

Stanescu T, Wachowicz K, Jaffray DA (2012) Characterization of tissue magnetic susceptibility-induced distortions for MRIgRT. Med Phys 39(12):7185–7193. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4764481 CrossRefPubMed

19.

Chen X, Prior P, Chen GP et al (2016) Technical note: dose effects of 1.5 T transverse magnetic field on tissue interfaces in MRI-guided radiotherapy. Med Phys 43(8Part1):4797–4802. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4959534 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Anderson CM, Sun W, Buatti JM et al (2014) Interobserver and intermodality variability in GTV delineation on CT, FDG-PET, and MR images of head and neck cancer. Jacobs J Radiat Oncol 1:006PubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Comparison between CT- and MRI-derived head and neck cancer target volumes using an integrated MRI-tri-60Co teletherapy device
Authors: Allen M. Chen
Govind Raghavan
Minsong Cao
Argin G. Mikaielian
Ali R. Sepahdari
Publication date: 01-06-2018
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Journal of Radiation Oncology / Issue 2/2018
Print ISSN: 1948-7894
Electronic ISSN: 1948-7908
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13566-017-0337-0

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2018

Effect of BioZorb® surgical marker placement on post-operative radiation boost target volume

Intraoperative radiation therapy as part of planned monotherapy for early-stage breast cancer

Radical treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer—are options equal?

An economic analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 94-10: cost-efficacy of concurrent vs. sequential chemoradiotherapy

Image-guided adaptive radiotherapy improves acute toxicity during intensity-modulated radiation therapy for head and neck cancer

THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE RADIATION ONCOLOGY SUMMIT: ACRO 2018

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer