首页> 外文OA文献 >Interobserver delineation uncertainty in involved-node radiation therapy (INRT) for early-stage Hodgkin lymphoma: on behalf of the Radiotherapy Committee of the EORTC lymphoma group
【2h】

Interobserver delineation uncertainty in involved-node radiation therapy (INRT) for early-stage Hodgkin lymphoma: on behalf of the Radiotherapy Committee of the EORTC lymphoma group

机译:早期霍奇金淋巴瘤受累结点放疗(INRT)的观察者间界限不确定性:代表EORTC淋巴瘤组放疗委员会

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In early-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) the target volume nowadays consists of the volume of the originally involved nodes. Delineation of this volume on a post-chemotherapy CT-scan is challenging. We report on the interobserver variability in target volume definition and its impact on resulting treatment plans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two representative cases were selected (1: male, stage IB, localization: left axilla; 2: female, stage IIB, localizations: mediastinum and bilateral neck). Eight experienced observers individually defined the clinical target volume (CTV) using involved-node radiotherapy (INRT) as defined by the EORTC-GELA guidelines for the H10 trial. A consensus contour was generated and the standard deviation computed. We investigated the overlap between observer and consensus contour [Sørensen-Dice coefficient (DSC)] and the magnitude of gross deviations between the surfaces of the observer and consensus contour (Hausdorff distance). 3D-conformal (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans were calculated for each contour in order to investigate the impact of interobserver variability on each treatment modality. Similar target coverage was enforced for all plans. RESULTS: The median CTV was 120 cm(3) (IQR: 95-173 cm(3)) for Case 1, and 255 cm(3) (IQR: 183-293 cm(3)) for Case 2. DSC values were generally high (>0.7), and Hausdorff distances were about 30 mm. The SDs between all observer contours, providing an estimate of the systematic error associated with delineation uncertainty, ranged from 1.9 to 3.8 mm (median: 3.2 mm). Variations in mean dose resulting from different observer contours were small and were not higher in IMRT plans than in 3D-CRT plans. CONCLUSIONS: We observed considerable differences in target volume delineation, but the systematic delineation uncertainty of around 3 mm is comparable to that reported in other tumour sites. This report is a first step towards calculating an evidence-based planning target volume margin for INRT in HL.
机译:背景与目的:在早期的经典霍奇金淋巴瘤(HL)中,如今的目标体积包括最初累及的淋巴结的体积。在化学疗法后的CT扫描中确定该体积具有挑战性。我们报告了目标量定义中观察者间的差异及其对最终治疗计划的影响。材料与方法:选择两个代表性病例(1:男性,IB期,定位:左腋窝; 2:女性,IIB期,定位:纵隔和双侧颈)。八名经验丰富的观察者分别使用EORTC-GELA指南针对H10试验定义的受累结点放疗(INRT)定义了临床目标体积(CTV)。生成一个一致的轮廓并计算标准偏差。我们研究了观察者和共识轮廓[Sørensen-Dice系数(DSC)]之间的重叠以及观察者和共识轮廓的表面之间的总体偏差的大小(Hausdorff距离)。为了研究观察者间变异性对每种治疗方式的影响,计算了每个轮廓的3D保形(3D-CRT)和强度调制放射治疗(IMRT)计划。所有计划都实施了类似的目标覆盖率。结果:案例1的中位CTV为120 cm(3)(IQR:95-173 cm(3)),案例2的中位CTV为255 cm(3)(IQR:183-293 cm(3))。通常高度(> 0.7),并且Hausdorff距离约为30mm。所有观察者轮廓之间的标准差提供了与轮廓不确定性相关的系统误差的估计,范围为1.9至3.8mm(中位数:3.2mm)。与3D-CRT计划相比,IMRT计划中由不同观察者轮廓引起的平均剂量变化很小,并且不高。结论:我们观察到目标体积的轮廓存在很大差异,但是系统轮廓的不确定性约为3mm,可与其他肿瘤部位报道的相媲美。这份报告是迈向HL INRT计算基于证据的规划目标体积裕度的第一步。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号