Inter-observer variability in the delineation of pharyngo-laryngeal tumor, parotid glands and cervical spinal cord:: Comparison between CT-scan and MRI

被引:148
作者
Geets, X
Daisne, JF
Arcangeli, S
Coche, E
De Poel, M
Duprez, T
Nardella, G
Grégoire, V
机构
[1] Univ Catholique Louvain, St Luc Univ Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, B-1200 Brussels, Belgium
[2] Univ Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Policlin A Gemelli, Dept Radiat Oncol, Rome, Italy
[3] Univ Catholique Louvain, St Luc Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, B-1200 Brussels, Belgium
[4] Erasmus Med Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[5] Azienda Hosp A Disumma, Dept Radiat Oncol, Brindisi, Italy
关键词
inter-observer variability; GTV; spinal cord; parotid; CT-scan; MRI;
D O I
10.1016/j.radonc.2005.04.010
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background and purpose: The goal of this study was to compare the inter-observer variability between CT and MRI for the delineation of pharyngo-laryngeal SCC, parotid glands and spinal cord. Patients and methods: Twenty pharyngo-laryngeal tumors were delineated by five observers on CT and MRI, using consistent delineation guidelines. Spinal cords and parotid glands were also delineated on CT and MRI by three observers. Mean GTVs and coefficients of variation were calculated for each observer and compared using ANOVA and its derived Pearson intra-class coefficient ((R) over cap). For GTVs, a mismatch analysis (ratio between intersection and union volumes) was also performed. Results: Regarding oropharyngeal GTVs (n=10), no significant difference was observed between observers either with CT (33.9, 31.1, 32, 34 and 34.7 ml, five observers, P=0.47) or with MRI (30.5, 29.4, 30.1 and 31.5 ml, four observers, P=0.59). CVs (13.6 vs 12.9%), (0.98 vs 0.99) and mismatches (0.43 vs 0.42) between CT and MRI did not significantly differ. Regarding laryngeal-hypopharyngeal GTVs (n=10), no significant difference was observed between observers either on CT (18.1, 20.7, 20.9, 19.3 and 21.9 ml, five observers, P=0.29) or on MRI (19.3, 21.5, 20, 22.1 and 21.8 ml, five observers, P=0.16). CVs (20.2 vs 13.8%), (0.94 vs 0.94) and mismatches (0.31 vs 0.41) were comparable. Regarding OARs, a small but significant difference in mean parotid volume was observed between observers (P<0.001) and between modalities (P<0.001) (CT: 34.8, 29.4, and 26.8 ml; MRI: 30.6, 27.9 and 20.4 ml). Similar results were obtained for mean spinal cord volumes (CT: 10.7, 10.6, and 9.5 ml; MRI: 8.7, 8.5 and 8.2 ml; P=0.05). Conclusions: Our results did not show any clinical advantage of MRI over CT for the delineation of pharyngo-laryngeal GTVs, spinal cord and parotid glands delineation. (C) 2005 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:25 / 31
页数:7
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]  
BEKER M, 1995, RADIOLOGY, P661
[2]   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].
Caldwell, CB ;
Mah, K ;
Ung, YC ;
Danjoux, CE ;
Balogh, JM ;
Ganguli, SN ;
Ehrlich, LE .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2001, 51 (04) :923-931
[3]   Interphysician variability in defining the planning target volume in the irradiation of prostate and seminal vesicles [J].
Cazzaniga, LF ;
Marinoni, MA ;
Bossi, A ;
Bianchi, E ;
Cagna, E ;
Cosentino, D ;
Scandolaro, L ;
Valli, M ;
Frigerio, M .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 1998, 47 (03) :293-296
[4]   Nasopharyngeal carcinoma volume measurements determined with computed tomography: Study of intraobserver and interobserver variability [J].
Chang, CC ;
Chen, MK ;
Wu, HK ;
Liu, MT .
JOURNAL OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY, 2002, 31 (06) :361-365
[5]   Evaluation of a multimodality image (CT, MRI and PET) coregistration procedure on phantom and head and neck cancer patients:: accuracy, reproducibility and consistency [J].
Daisne, JF ;
Sibomana, M ;
Bol, A ;
Cosnard, G ;
Lonneux, M ;
Grégoire, V .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2003, 69 (03) :237-245
[6]  
DAISNE JF, IN PRESS RADIOLOGY
[7]   Intra- and inter-observer variability in contouring prostate and seminal vesicles: implications for conformal treatment planning [J].
Fiorino, C ;
Reni, M ;
Bolognesi, A ;
Cattaneo, GM ;
Calandrino, R .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 1998, 47 (03) :285-292
[8]   Role of 11-C-methionine positron emission tomography for the delineation of the tumor volume in pharyngo-laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma: comparison with FDG-PET and CT [J].
Geets, X ;
Daisne, JF ;
Gregoire, V ;
Hamoir, M ;
Lonneux, M .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2004, 71 (03) :267-273
[9]   Intensity-modulated radiation therapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma:: An adaptation of 2-dimensional concepts or a reconsideration of current clinical practice [J].
Grégoire, V ;
Maingon, P .
SEMINARS IN RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2004, 14 (02) :110-120
[10]   CT-based delineation of lymph node levels and related CTVs in the node-negative neck:: DAHANCA, EORTC, GORTEC, NCIC, RTOG consensus guidelines [J].
Grégoire, V ;
Levendag, P ;
Ang, KK ;
Bernier, J ;
Braaksma, M ;
Budach, V ;
Chao, C ;
Coche, E ;
Cooper, JS ;
Cosnard, G ;
Eisbruch, A ;
El-Sayed, S ;
Emami, B ;
Grau, C ;
Hamoir, M ;
Lee, N ;
Maingon, P ;
Muller, K ;
Reychler, H .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2003, 69 (03) :227-236