1
|
Gkika E, Kostyszyn D, Fechter T, Moustakis C, Ernst F, Boda-Heggemann J, Sarria G, Dieckmann K, Dobiasch S, Duma MN, Eberle F, Kroeger K, Häussler B, Izaguirre V, Jazmati D, Lautenschläger S, Lohaus F, Mantel F, Menzel J, Pachmann S, Pavic M, Radlanski K, Riesterer O, Gerum S, Röder F, Willner J, Barczyk S, Imhoff D, Blanck O, Wittig A, Guckenberger M, Grosu AL, Brunner TB. Interobserver agreement on definition of the target volume in stereotactic radiotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma using different imaging modalities. Strahlenther Onkol 2023; 199:973-981. [PMID: 37268767 PMCID: PMC10598103 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02085-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2022] [Accepted: 04/11/2023] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study was to evaluate interobserver agreement (IOA) on target volume definition for pancreatic cancer (PACA) within the Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Radiotherapy Working Group of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) and to identify the influence of imaging modalities on the definition of the target volumes. METHODS Two cases of locally advanced PACA and one local recurrence were selected from a large SBRT database. Delineation was based on either a planning 4D CT with or without (w/wo) IV contrast, w/wo PET/CT, and w/wo diagnostic MRI. Novel compared to other studies, a combination of four metrics was used to integrate several aspects of target volume segmentation: the Dice coefficient (DSC), the Hausdorff distance (HD), the probabilistic distance (PBD), and the volumetric similarity (VS). RESULTS For all three GTVs, the median DSC was 0.75 (range 0.17-0.95), the median HD 15 (range 3.22-67.11) mm, the median PBD 0.33 (range 0.06-4.86), and the median VS was 0.88 (range 0.31-1). For ITVs and PTVs the results were similar. When comparing the imaging modalities for delineation, the best agreement for the GTV was achieved using PET/CT, and for the ITV and PTV using 4D PET/CT, in treatment position with abdominal compression. CONCLUSION Overall, there was good GTV agreement (DSC). Combined metrics appeared to allow a more valid detection of interobserver variation. For SBRT, either 4D PET/CT or 3D PET/CT in treatment position with abdominal compression leads to better agreement and should be considered as a very useful imaging modality for the definition of treatment volumes in pancreatic SBRT. Contouring does not appear to be the weakest link in the treatment planning chain of SBRT for PACA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Gkika
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Robert Koch Str 3, Freiburg, Germany.
| | - D Kostyszyn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Robert Koch Str 3, Freiburg, Germany
| | - T Fechter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Robert Koch Str 3, Freiburg, Germany
| | - C Moustakis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Muenster, Muenster, Germany
| | - F Ernst
- Institute for Robotics and Cognitive Systems, University of Luebeck, Luebeck, Germany
| | - J Boda-Heggemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine Mannheim, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - G Sarria
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - K Dieckmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Departments of the MedUni Vienna, Vienna General Hospital, Vienna, Austria
| | - S Dobiasch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, TU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - M N Duma
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Jena, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany
| | - F Eberle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| | - K Kroeger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Muenster, Muenster, Germany
| | - B Häussler
- Radiation Oncology Dr. Häussler/Dr. Schorer, Munich, Germany
| | - V Izaguirre
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Halle, Halle, Germany
| | - D Jazmati
- Proton Therapy Centre, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - S Lautenschläger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, Marburg, Germany
| | - F Lohaus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - F Mantel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - J Menzel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - S Pachmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Weilheim Clinic, Weilheim, Germany
| | - M Pavic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - K Radlanski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charite, University Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - O Riesterer
- Centre for Radiation Oncology KSA-KSB, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - S Gerum
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Clinic, Paracelsus Medical University (PMU), Salzburg, Austria
| | - F Röder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Clinic, Paracelsus Medical University (PMU), Salzburg, Austria
| | - J Willner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany
| | - S Barczyk
- Center for Radiation Oncology, Belegklinik am St. Agnes-Hospital, Bocholt, Germany
| | - D Imhoff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Saphir Radiosurgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - O Blanck
- Saphir Radiosurgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - A Wittig
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Jena, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany
| | - M Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Anca-L Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Robert Koch Str 3, Freiburg, Germany
| | - T B Brunner
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Barriga LE, Zaharia M, Pinillos L, Moscol A, Heredia A, Sarria G, Marquina J, Barriga O, Picon C. Long-term follow-up of radiation accident patients in Peru: review of two cases. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2012; 151:652-655. [PMID: 22914334 DOI: 10.1093/rpd/ncs175] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
Overexposure to radioactive sources used in radiotherapy or industrial radiography may result in severe health consequences. This report assesses the initial clinical status and the medical and psychological long-term follow-up of two radiation accident patients from Peru during the mid-to-late 1990s: one patient exposed to a radiotherapy (60)Co source in Arequipa, the other patient to a (192)Ir source in Yanango. Commonalities and differences are described. The main causes in both accidents were human error and the failure to apply appropriate safety guidelines and standard operating procedures. Education and training of the personnel working with radiation sources are essential to prevent accidents. The experience gained from the medical management of the two patients is valuable for future treatment of such patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L E Barriga
- Centro de Radioterapia de Lima, Calle 22 No 202, Urb. Corpac, San Borja, Lima, Perú.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|