Impact of inter-observer variations in target volume delineation on dose volume indices for accelerated partial breast irradiation with multi-catheter interstitial brachytherapy

Assessing Interobserver Variability in the Delineation of Structures in Radiation Oncology: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The delineation of target volumes and organs at risk is the main source of uncertainty in radiation therapy. Numerous interobserver variability (IOV) studies have been conducted, often with unclear methodology and nonstandardized reporting. We aimed to identify the parameters chosen in conducting delineation IOV studies and assess their performances and limits.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We conducted a systematic literature review to highlight major points of heterogeneity and missing data in IOV studies published between 2018 and 2021. For the main used metrics, we did in silico analyses to assess their limits in specific clinical situations.

RESULTS

All disease sites were represented in the 66 studies examined. Organs at risk were studied independently of tumor site in 29% of reviewed IOV studies. In 65% of studies, statistical analyses were performed. No gold standard (GS; ie, reference) was defined in 36% of studies. A single expert was considered as the GS in 21% of studies, without testing intraobserver variability. All studies reported both absolute and relative indices, including the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) in 68% and the Hausdorff distance (HD) in 42%. Limitations were shown in silico for small structures when using the DSC and dependence on irregular shapes when using the HD. Variations in DSC values were large between studies, and their thresholds were inconsistent. Most studies (51%) included 1 to 10 cases. The median number of observers or experts was 7 (range, 2-35). The intraclass correlation coefficient was reported in only 9% of cases. Investigating the feasibility of studying IOV in delineation, a minimum of 8 observers with 3 cases, or 11 observers with 2 cases, was required to demonstrate moderate reproducibility.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of future IOV studies would benefit from a more standardized methodology: clear definitions of the gold standard and metrics and a justification of the tradeoffs made in the choice of the number of observers and number of delineated cases should be provided.

On the implant stability in adaptive multi-catheter breast brachytherapy: Establishment of a decision-tree for treatment re-planning

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To assess implant stability and identify causes of implant variations during high-dose-rate multi-catheter breast brachytherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Planning-CTs were compared to control-CTs acquired halfway through the treatment for 100 patients. For assessing geometric stability, Fréchet-distance and button-to-button distance changes of all catheters as well as variations of Euclidean distances and convex hulls of all dwell positions were determined. The CTs were inspected to identify the causes of geometric changes. Dosimetric effects were evaluated by target volume transfers and re-contouring of organs at risk. The dose non-uniformity ratio (DNR), 100% and 150% isodose volumes (V₁₀₀ and V₁₅₀), coverage index (CI), and organ doses were calculated. Correlations between the examined geometric and dosimetric parameters were assessed.

RESULTS

Fréchet-distance and dwell position deviations >2.5 mm as well as button-to-button distance changes >5 mm were detected for 5%, 2%, and 6.3% of catheters, but for 32, 17, and 37 patients, respectively. Variations occurred enhanced in the lateral breast and close to the ribs, e.g. due to different arm positions. Only small dosimetric effects with median DNR, V₁₀₀, and CI variations of -0.01 ± 0.02, (-0.5 ± 1.3)ccm, and (-1.4 ± 1.8)% were observed in general. Skin dose exceeded recommended levels for 12 of 100 patients. Various correlations between geometric and dosimetric implant stability were found, based on which decision-tree regarding treatment re-planning was established.

CONCLUSION

Multi-catheter breast brachytherapy shows a high implant stability in general, but considering skin dose changes is important. To increase implant stability for individual patients, we plan to investigate patient immobilization aids during treatments.

Coverage with dosimetric concordance index (CDCI): a tool for evaluating dosimetric impact of inter-observer target variability in brachytherapy

Purpose

The aim of this study was to propose an index for evaluating dosimetric impact of inter-observer target delineation variability in brachytherapy.

Material and methods

The coverage with dosimetric concordance index (CDCI) is expressed as CDCI_common and CDCI_pair. The CDCI_common is the mean coverage of target volume with common volume irradiated by prescription dose among all observers and represents the condition of worst target coverage. CDCI_pair is the generalized form of CDCI, which is mean target coverage with common prescription volume obtained between all possible pairs of observers and represents more realistic coverage of target with dosimetric concordance. The index was used to evaluate the dosimetric impact of target delineation variability in optimized conformal plans on target volumes of five radiation oncologists for twenty patients of multi-catheter interstitial partial breast brachytherapy.

Results

The mean decline of 5.6 ±3.2% and 11.3 ±5.7% in CDCI_pair and CDCI_common, respectively, was observed comparing to coverage index (CI) of target volume in all patients due to inter-observer target variability. CDCI_common and CDCI_pair were found to have significant linear correlation (r = 0.964, p < 0.000). The difference between CDC and CI increased with the mean relative target volume among observers. Significant correlation (r = 0.962, p < 0.000) was also noted for the difference (Δ) in CDCI_common and CDCI_pair with CI of target volume.

Conclusions

The recommended indices and difference between the dosimetric coverage of target volume (CI) with CDCI (ΔCDCI) can be used for evaluating dosimetric impact of the inter-observer target delineation variability.

Is adaptive treatment planning in multi-catheter interstitial breast brachytherapy necessary?

PURPOSE

For 55 patients treated with interstitial multi-catheter breast brachytherapy the need for adaptive treatment planning was assessed.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

For all patients a treatment planning computed tomography (CT) and a follow-up CT were acquired and used for the retrospective evaluation. Keeping dwell time and dwell positions constant, the treatment plan assessed directly after catheter implantation was compared to the situation 48 h after implantation. Both manual catheter reconstructions, based on the planning and follow-up CT, were rigid registered to each other and the resulting deviations analyzed, like the difference between corresponding dwell positions (ΔDP) or the discrete Fréchet distance. Further, the dosimetric changes, e.g., coverage index (ΔCI), conformal index (ΔCOIN) and dose non-uniformity ratio (ΔDNR) were considered for a deformed planning target volume (PTV) and the rigid warped PTV structure. The PTV was deformed according to the vector field estimated between the two acquired CTs.

RESULTS

Over all patients with rigid aligned CTs a mean ΔDP, ΔCI, ΔCOIN and ΔDNR were determined to 2.41 ± 1.73 mm, 3.10 ± 3.17%, 0.009 ± 0.007 and 0.036 ± 0.040, respectively. Considering the deformed PTV ΔCI was estimated to 5.05 ± 4.14%.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, in 4% of the cases re-planning would have been beneficial to ensure the planned dose delivery. Large PTV changes or large DP deviations were found to be the main reasons for dosimetric variations.

Impact of inter- and intra-observer variabilities of catheter reconstruction on multi-catheter interstitial brachytherapy of breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate inter- and intra-observer variabilities of catheter reconstruction and its dosimetric impact for multi-catheter interstitial breast cancer patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In order to evaluate inter-observer variabilities (IOV) three medical physicists reconstructed the catheter traces of 13 patients. These manual reconstructions were further compared to the automatic reconstruction algorithm integrated into the planning system and one on purpose imprecise manual reconstruction. For intra-observer variabilities (IAV) repeated reconstructions of two physicists were compared for 13 patients. In total 426 catheters were considered. Keeping dwell times, dwell positions, the optimization and the normalization relative points constant the geometrical deviations between the corresponding dwell positions of the reference data set and the investigated reconstructions were evaluated. Also, the effect on the quality indices, such as coverage index (CI), dose non-uniformity ratio (DNR) or conformal index (COIN), and the exposure of the organs at risk were analyzed.

RESULTS

Over all patients and all different catheter reconstructions considered for IOV a mean deviation between the corresponding dwell positions of 0.60 ± 0.35 mm was detected. The first observer had a mean deviation of 0.54 ± 0.32 mm, whereas the second observer yielded a mean deviation of 0.58 ± 0.37 mm. The length of the catheter traces varied in the mean by 0.51 ± 0.45 mm. The mean relative deviation of the CI, DNR, COIN, mean heart dose and mean lung dose varied by 0.27 ± 0.31%, 0.0027 ± 0.0025, 0.0036 ± 0.0033, 0.024 ± 0.019%, 0.05 ± 0.11%, respectively. The skin dose (D_0.2ccm) changed in the maximum 8.52%. On average IAV reached a deviation between the corresponding dwell positions of 0.49 ± 0.30 mm. IOVs and IAVs proved to be significantly different (Wilcoxon's test p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The study proved that a repeated reconstruction of the catheter traces does not lead to large geometrical deviations or to a significant change in the dose exposure. But the lack of ground truth makes the estimation of the quality of the reconstruction challenging. A precise reconstruction mapping the reality is a necessity for the planned dose delivery. With all considered reconstruction techniques reliable quality indices for the target and the organs at risk could be obtained.

Effectiveness of different accelerated partial breast irradiation techniques for the treatment of breast cancer patients: Systematic review using indirect comparisons of randomized clinical trials

AIM

This systematic review was conducted to compare the effectiveness of different accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) techniques for the treatment of breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND

Numerous (APBI) techniques are available for clinical practice.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of APBI versus whole breast irradiation (WBI). The data from APBI studies were extracted for the analyses. Indirect comparisons were used to compare different APBI techniques.

RESULTS

Ten studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A total of 4343 patients were included, most of them with tumor stage T1-T2 and N0. Regarding APBI techniques, six trials used external beam radiation therapy; one intraoperative electrons; one intraoperative low-energy photons; one brachytherapy; and one external beam radiation therapy or brachytherapy. The indirect comparisons related to 5-years local control and 5-years overall survival were not significantly different between APBI techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on indirect comparisons, no differences in clinical outcomes were observed among diverse APBI techniques in published clinical trials that formally compared WBI to APBI. However wide confidence intervals and high risk of inconsistency precluded a sound conclusion. Further head-to-head clinical trials comparing different APBI techniques are required to confirm our findings. Studies comparing different techniques using individual participant data and/or real-life data from population-based studies/registries could also provide more robust results.