Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 12/2013

01-12-2013 | Original Article

Pathology-based validation of FDG PET segmentation tools for volume assessment of lymph node metastases from head and neck cancer

Authors: Dominic A. X. Schinagl, Paul N. Span, Frank J. A. van den Hoogen, Matthias A. W. Merkx, Piet J. Slootweg, Wim J. G. Oyen, Johannes H. A. M. Kaanders

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Issue 12/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

FDG PET is increasingly incorporated into radiation treatment planning of head and neck cancer. However, there are only limited data on the accuracy of radiotherapy target volume delineation by FDG PET. The purpose of this study was to validate FDG PET segmentation tools for volume assessment of lymph node metastases from head and neck cancer against the pathological method as the standard.

Methods

Twelve patients with head and neck cancer and 28 metastatic lymph nodes eligible for therapeutic neck dissection underwent preoperative FDG PET/CT. The metastatic lymph nodes were delineated on CT (NodeCT) and ten PET segmentation tools were used to assess FDG PET-based nodal volumes: interpreting FDG PET visually (PETVIS), applying an isocontour at a standardized uptake value (SUV) of 2.5 (PETSUV), two segmentation tools with a fixed threshold of 40 % and 50 %, and two adaptive threshold based methods. The latter four tools were applied with the primary tumour as reference and also with the lymph node itself as reference. Nodal volumes were compared with the true volume as determined by pathological examination.

Results

Both NodeCT and PETVIS showed good correlations with the pathological volume. PET segmentation tools using the metastatic node as reference all performed well but not better than PETVIS. The tools using the primary tumour as reference correlated poorly with pathology. PETSUV was unsatisfactory in 35 % of the patients due to merging of the contours of adjacent nodes.

Conclusion

FDG PET accurately estimates metastatic lymph node volume, but beyond the detection of lymph node metastases (staging), it has no added value over CT alone for the delineation of routine radiotherapy target volumes. If FDG PET is used in radiotherapy planning, treatment adaptation or response assessment, we recommend an automated segmentation method for purposes of reproducibility and interinstitutional comparison.
Literature
1.
Schinagl DA, Kaanders JH, Oyen WJ. From anatomical to biological target volumes: the role of PET in radiation treatment planning. Cancer Imaging. 2006;6:S107–16.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Troost EG, Schinagl DA, Bussink J, Boerman OC, van der Kogel AJ, Oyen WJ, et al. Innovations in radiotherapy planning of head and neck cancers: role of PET. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:66–76.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Heron DE, Andrade RS, Flickinger J, Johnson J, Agarwala SS, Wu A, et al. Hybrid PET-CT simulation for radiation treatment planning in head-and-neck cancers: a brief technical report. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;60:1419–24.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Nestle U, Kremp S, Schaefer-Schuler A, Sebastian-Welsch C, Hellwig D, Rube C, et al. Comparison of different methods for delineation of 18F-FDG PET-positive tissue for target volume definition in radiotherapy of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1342–8.PubMed
5.
Nishioka T, Shiga T, Shirato H, Tsukamoto E, Tsuchiya K, Kato T, et al. Image fusion between 18FDG-PET and MRI/CT for radiotherapy planning of oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal carcinomas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;53:1051–7.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Riegel AC, Berson AM, Destian S, Ng T, Tena LB, Mitnick RJ, et al. Variability of gross tumor volume delineation in head-and-neck cancer using CT and PET/CT fusion. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65:726–32.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Bradley J, Thorstad WL, Mutic S, Miller TR, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA, et al. Impact of FDG-PET on radiation therapy volume delineation in non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;59:78–86.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Hong R, Halama J, Bova D, Sethi A, Emami B. Correlation of PET standard uptake value and CT window-level thresholds for target delineation in CT-based radiation treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;67:720–6.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Paulino AC, Johnstone PA. FDG-PET in radiotherapy treatment planning: Pandora’s box? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;59:4–5.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Brianzoni E, Rossi G, Ancidei S, Berbellini A, Capoccetti F, Cidda C, et al. Radiotherapy planning: PET/CT scanner performances in the definition of gross tumor volume and clinical target volume. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:1392–9.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Ciernik IF, Dizendorf E, Baumert BG, Reiner B, Burger C, Davis JB, et al. Radiation treatment planning with an integrated positron emission and computed tomography (PET/CT): a feasibility study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;57:853–63.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Mah K, Caldwell CB, Ung YC, Danjoux CE, Balogh JM, Ganguli SN, et al. The impact of (18)FDG-PET on target and critical organs in CT-based treatment planning of patients with poorly defined non-small-cell lung carcinoma: a prospective study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;52:339–50.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Miller TR, Grigsby PW. Measurement of tumor volume by PET to evaluate prognosis in patients with advanced cervical cancer treated by radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;53:353–9.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Paulino AC, Koshy M, Howell R, Schuster D, Davis LW. Comparison of CT- and PET-defined gross tumor volume in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;61:1385–92.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Daisne JF, Sibomana M, Bol A, Doumont T, Lonneux M, Gregoire V. Tri-dimensional automatic segmentation of PET volumes based on measured source-to-background ratios: influence of reconstruction algorithms. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;69:247–50.
16.
Van Dalen JA, Hoffmann AL, Dicken V, Vogel WV, Wiering B, Ruers TJ, et al. A novel iterative method for lesion detection and volumetric quantification with FDG-PET. Nucl Med Commun. 2007;28:485–93.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Schinagl DA, Vogel WV, Hoffmann AL, van Dalen JA, Oyen WJ, Kaanders JH. Comparison of five segmentation tools for 18F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose-positron emission tomography-based target volume definition in head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;69:1282–9.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Schinagl DA, Hoffmann AL, Vogel WV, van Dalen JA, Verstappen SM, Oyen WJ, et al. Can FDG-PET assist in radiotherapy target volume definition of metastatic lymph nodes in head-and-neck cancer? Radiother Oncol. 2009;91:95–100.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Caldas-Magalhaes J, Kasperts N, Kooij N, van den Berg CA, Terhaard CH, Raaijmakers CP, et al. Validation of imaging with pathology in laryngeal cancer: accuracy of the registration methodology. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82:e289–98.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Daisne JF, Duprez T, Weynand B, Lonneux M, Hamoir M, Reychler H, et al. Tumor volume in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma: comparison at CT, MR imaging, and FDG PET and validation with surgical specimen. Radiology. 2004;233:93–100.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Hatt M, le Cheze RC, Descourt P, Dekker A, De RD, Oellers M, et al. Accurate automatic delineation of heterogeneous functional volumes in positron emission tomography for oncology applications. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;77:301–8.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Geets X, Lee JA, Bol A, Lonneux M, Gregoire V. A gradient-based method for segmenting FDG-PET images: methodology and validation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1427–38.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Zaidi H, Abdoli M, Fuentes CL, El Naqa I. Comparative methods for PET image segmentation in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:881–91.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Vogel WV, Wensing BM, van Dalen JA, Krabbe PF, van den Hoogen FJ, Oyen WJ. Optimised PET reconstruction of the head and neck area: improved diagnostic accuracy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:1276–82.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:932–45.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Baek CH, Chung MK, Son YI, Choi JY, Kim HJ, Yim YJ, et al. Tumor volume assessment by 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with oral cavity cancer with dental artifacts on CT or MR images. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1422–8.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Burri RJ, Rangaswamy B, Kostakoglu L, Hoch B, Genden EM, Som PM, et al. Correlation of positron emission tomography standard uptake value and pathologic specimen size in cancer of the head and neck. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;71:682–8.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Seitz O, Chambron-Pinho N, Middendorp M, Sader R, Mack M, Vogl TJ, et al. 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. 2009;51:677–86.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Arens AI, Troost EG, Schinagl D, Kaanders JH, Oyen WJ. FDG-PET/CT in radiation treatment planning of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;55:521–8.PubMed
30.
Schinagl DA, Span PN, Oyen WJ, Kaanders JH. Can FDG PET predict radiation treatment outcome in head and neck cancer? Results of a prospective study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1449–58.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Pathology-based validation of FDG PET segmentation tools for volume assessment of lymph node metastases from head and neck cancer
Authors
Dominic A. X. Schinagl
Paul N. Span
Frank J. A. van den Hoogen
Matthias A. W. Merkx
Piet J. Slootweg
Wim J. G. Oyen
Johannes H. A. M. Kaanders
Publication date
01-12-2013
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue 12/2013
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2513-9

Other articles of this Issue 12/2013

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 12/2013 Go to the issue

Editorial

2013: another good year for EJNMMI

Letter to the Editor

Combined 18F-fluoride and 18F-FDG PET/CT: a response based on actual data from prospective studies

Society Communications

EANM Springer Prizes awarded at EANM’13 Lyon

Guidelines

The EANM and SNMMI practice guideline for lymphoscintigraphy and sentinel node localization in breast cancer

Original Article

The complementary roles of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT for imaging of carotid atherosclerosis

Original Article

Rapid blood clearance and lack of long-term renal toxicity of 177Lu-DOTATATE enables shortening of renoprotective amino acid infusion