We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
The dosimetric impact of target volume delineation variation for cervical cancer radiotherapy.
Radiotherapy and Oncology 2016 September
BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer inter-observer delineation variation has been demonstrated. This article addresses its dosimetric impact.
METHODS: 21 centres outlined two INTERLACE trial quality assurance test cases. A gold standard clinical target volume (GSCTV) was created from a consensus and STAPLE outline. RapidArc plans were created for all centres' planning target volumes (PTVs; PTV1+2). Gold standard PTVs (GSPTVs) were created for each plan by applying each centre's CTV-PTV margins to GSCTV. DVH parameters including D95% and Dmean for each PTV1+2 and GSPTV were compared, representing planned versus GSPTV delivered dose. PTV1+2 and GSPTV V95% was also calculated.
RESULTS: Reviewing all parameters, no plans achieved acceptable GSPTV coverage. GSPTV V95%⩾95% was not achieved for any plan. GSPTV V95%<90% in 15/21 (case 1) and 14/22 (case 2) and <80% in 2 plans from both cases. GSPTV V95% is on average 10-15% lower than planned and GSPTV D95% is 10-20% lower than planned. Most common GSCTV anatomical areas not receiving 95% dose were vagina, obturator and external iliac nodes and, in case 1, the superior nodal aspect.
CONCLUSION: Cervical cancer CTV delineation variation leads to significant reductions in dose delivered to GSPTV. This highlights the ongoing importance of standardising delineation in the IMRT era.
METHODS: 21 centres outlined two INTERLACE trial quality assurance test cases. A gold standard clinical target volume (GSCTV) was created from a consensus and STAPLE outline. RapidArc plans were created for all centres' planning target volumes (PTVs; PTV1+2). Gold standard PTVs (GSPTVs) were created for each plan by applying each centre's CTV-PTV margins to GSCTV. DVH parameters including D95% and Dmean for each PTV1+2 and GSPTV were compared, representing planned versus GSPTV delivered dose. PTV1+2 and GSPTV V95% was also calculated.
RESULTS: Reviewing all parameters, no plans achieved acceptable GSPTV coverage. GSPTV V95%⩾95% was not achieved for any plan. GSPTV V95%<90% in 15/21 (case 1) and 14/22 (case 2) and <80% in 2 plans from both cases. GSPTV V95% is on average 10-15% lower than planned and GSPTV D95% is 10-20% lower than planned. Most common GSCTV anatomical areas not receiving 95% dose were vagina, obturator and external iliac nodes and, in case 1, the superior nodal aspect.
CONCLUSION: Cervical cancer CTV delineation variation leads to significant reductions in dose delivered to GSPTV. This highlights the ongoing importance of standardising delineation in the IMRT era.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app