Superiority of Deformable Image Co-registration in the Integration of Diagnostic Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography to the Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Pathway for Oesophageal Carcinoma

18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography Parameters can Predict Long-Term Outcome Following Trimodality Treatment for Oesophageal Cancer

AIMS

¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (¹⁸FDG-PET/CT) is routinely used for the pre-treatment staging of oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junction cancers (EGEJC). The aim of this study was to identify objective ¹⁸FDG-PET/CT-derived parameters that can aid in predicting the patterns of recurrence and prognostication in patients with EGEJC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

EGEJC patients referred for consideration of preoperative chemoradiation therapy were identified and clinicopathological data were collected. ¹⁸FDG-PET/CT imaging data were reviewed and correlated with treatment outcomes. Maximum standardised uptake value (SUV_max), metabolic tumour volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis were assessed and association with recurrence-free survival (RFS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LR-RFS), oesophageal cancer-specific survival (ECSS) and overall survival were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curves, as well as Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier models.

RESULTS

In total, 191 EGEJC patients completed trimodality treatment and 164 with ¹⁸FDG-PET/CT data were included in this analysis. At the time of analysis, 15 (9.1%), 70 (42.7%) and two (1.2%) patients were noted to have locoregional, distant and both locoregional and distant metastases, respectively. The median RFS was 30 months (9.6-50.4) and the 5-year RFS was 31.1%. The 5-year overall survival and ECSS were both noted to be 34.8%. Pre-treatment MTV₂₅ > 28.5 cm³ (P = 0.029), MTV₄₀ > 12.4 cm³ (P = 0.018) and MTV₅₀ > 10.2 cm³ (P = 0.005) predicted for worse LR-RFS, ECSS and overall survival for MTV definition of voxels ≥25%, 40% and 50% of SUV_max.

CONCLUSION

¹⁸FDG-PET/CT parameters MTV and total lesion glycolysis are useful prognostic tools to predict for LR-RFS, ECSS and overall survival in EGEJC. MTV had the highest accuracy in predicting clinical outcomes. The volume cut-off points we identified for different MTV thresholds predicted outcomes with significant accuracy and may potentially be used for decision making in clinical practice.

SCOPE 2 - Still Answering the Unanswered Questions in Oesophageal Radiotherapy? SCOPE 2: a Randomised Phase II/III Trial to Study Radiotherapy Dose Escalation in Patients with Oesophageal Cancer Treated with Definitive Chemoradiation with an Embedded Phase II Trial for Patients with a Poor Early Response using Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography

The SCOPE 2 trial of definitive chemoradiotherapy in oesophageal cancer investigates the benefits of radiotherapy dose escalation and systemic therapy optimisation. The trial opened in 2016. The landscape of oesophageal cancer treatment over the lifetime of this trial has changed significantly and the protocol has evolved to reflect this. However, with the recent results of the Dutch phase III ART DECO study showing no improvement in local control or overall survival with radiotherapy dose escalation in a similar patient group, we sought to determine if the SCOPE 2 trial is still answering the key unanswered questions for oesophageal radiotherapy. Here we discuss the rationale behind the SCOPE 2 trial, outline the trial schema and review current data on dose escalation and outline recommendations for future areas of research.

Comparison of the Gross Target Volumes Based on Diagnostic PET/CT for Primary Esophageal Cancer

Background

Clinically, many esophageal cancer patients who planned for radiation therapy have already undergone diagnostic Positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging, but it remains unclear whether these imaging results can be used to delineate the gross target volume (GTV) of the primary tumor for thoracic esophageal cancer (EC).

Methods

Seventy-two patients diagnosed with thoracic EC had undergone prior PET/CT for diagnosis and three-dimensional CT (3DCT) for simulation. The GTV_3D was contoured on the 3DCT image without referencing the PET/CT image. The GTV_PET-ref was contoured on the 3DCT image referencing the PET/CT image. The GTV_PET-reg was contoured on the deformed registration image derived from 3DCT and PET/CT. Differences in the position, volume, length, conformity index (CI), and degree of inclusion (DI) among the target volumes were determined.

Results

The centroid distance in the three directions between two different GTVs showed no significant difference (P > 0.05). No significant difference was found among the groups in the tumor volume (P > 0.05). The median DI values of the GTV_PET-reg and GTV_PET-ref in the GTV_3D were 0.82 and 0.86, respectively (P = 0.006). The median CI values of the GTV_3D in the GTV_PET-reg and GTV_PET-ref were 0.68 and 0.72, respectively (P = 0.006).

Conclusions

PET/CT can be used to optimize the definition of the target volume in EC. However, no significant difference was found between the GTVs delineated based on visual referencing or deformable registration whether using the volume or position. So, in the absence of planning PET–CT images, it is also feasible to delineate the GTV of primary thoracic EC with reference to the diagnostic PET–CT image.

Radiotherapy volume delineation using 18F-FDG-PET/CT modifies gross node volume in patients with oesophageal cancer

PURPOSE

Evidence supporting the use of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the segmentation process of oesophageal cancer for radiotherapy planning is limited. Our aim was to compare the volumes and tumour lengths defined by fused PET/CT vs. CT simulation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-nine patients were analyzed. All patients underwent a single PET/CT simulation scan. Two separate GTVs were defined: one based on CT data alone and another based on fused PET/CT data. Volume sizes for both data sets were compared and the spatial overlap was assessed by the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC).

RESULTS

The gross tumour volume (GTVtumour) and maximum tumour diameter were greater by PET/CT, and length of primary tumour was greater by CT, but differences were not statistically significant. However, the gross node volume (GTVnode) was significantly greater by PET/CT. The DSC analysis showed excellent agreement for GTVtumour, 0.72, but was very low for GTVnode, 0.25.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that the volume definition by PET/CT and CT data differs. CT simulation, without taking into account PET/CT information, might leave cancer-involved nodes out of the radiotherapy-delineated volumes.

Assessment of dose variation for accelerated partial-breast irradiation using rigid and deformable image registrations

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to estimate the delivered dose to the target and organs at risk (OAR) for external beam accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI) accounting for day-to-day setup uncertainties, using rigid and deformable image registration.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One planning computed tomography (CT) scan and 5 cone beam CT scans for each of 25 patients previously treated with tangential breast radiation therapy were used. All cone beam CT scans were registered to the planning CT scan using 3 techniques: (1) rigid registration based on bony anatomy only, (2) rigid registration based on soft-tissue only, and (3) deformable image registration. For each patient, 4 dose distributions were calculated for APBI. The first dose distribution was the original plan. The other 3 were "dose-of-the-day" for each of the registration approaches. The effects of image registrations on estimating delivered dose to targets and OAR were determined.

RESULTS

The average reductions in V₉₅ (percentage of the PTV that received 95% of the prescribed dose) were 6%, 7%, and 5% for bone, soft-tissue, and deformable registrations, respectively. The average increase in mean dose to the heart were 9%, 9%, and 18% for bone, soft-tissue, and deformable registrations, respectively, whereas the average increase in maximum dose to the contralateral breast were 19%, 20%, and 28%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study have shown that there are differences between the planned and estimated delivered dose for APBI because of day-to-day setup uncertainties that may need to be accounted for. Estimated dosimetric impact of setup variation and breast deformation assessed using deformable registration was greater for OARs and smaller for target volumes compared to rigid registration.