Min Myo, Roos Daniel, Keating Elly, Penniment Michael, Carruthers Scott, Zanchetta Lydia, Wong Karen, Shakeshaft John, Baxi Siddhartha
Alan Walker Cancer Centre, Royal Darwin Hospital, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia; Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2014;58(3):360-8. doi: 10.1111/1754-9485.12175. Epub 2014 Apr 9.
The aims of the study were to evaluate interobserver variability in contouring the brachial plexus (BP) using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)-approved protocol and to analyse BP dosimetries.
Seven outliners independently contoured the BPs of 15 consecutive patients. Interobserver variability was reviewed qualitatively (visually by using planning axial computed-tomography images and anteroposterior digitally reconstructed radiographs) and quantitatively (by volumetric and statistical analyses). Dose-volume histograms of BPs were calculated and compared.
We found significant interobserver variability among outliners in both qualitative and quantitative analyses. These were most pronounced for the T1 nerve roots on visual inspection and for the BP volume on statistical analysis. The BP volumes were smaller than those described in the RTOG atlas paper, with a mean volume of 20.8 cc (range 11-40.7 cc) compared with 33 ± 4 cc (25.1-39.4 cc). The average values of mean dose, maximum dose, V60Gy, V66Gy and V70Gy for patients treated with conventional radiotherapy and IMRT were 42.2 Gy versus 44.8 Gy, 64.5 Gy versus 68.5 Gy, 6.1% versus 7.6%, 2.9% versus 2.4% and 0.6% versus 0.3%, respectively.
This is the first independent external evaluation of the published protocol. We have identified several issues, including significant interobserver variation. Although radiation oncologists should contour BPs to avoid dose dumping, especially when using IMRT, the RTOG atlas should be used with caution. Because BPs are largely radiologically occult on CT, we propose the term brachial-plexus regions (BPRs) to represent regions where BPs are likely to be present. Consequently, BPRs should in principle be contoured generously.
本研究的目的是使用放射治疗肿瘤学组(RTOG)批准的方案评估在勾画臂丛神经(BP)时观察者间的变异性,并分析BP的剂量学。
七名轮廓勾画者独立勾画了15例连续患者的BP。通过定性(使用计划轴向计算机断层扫描图像和前后位数字重建X线片进行视觉评估)和定量(通过体积分析和统计分析)方法评估观察者间的变异性。计算并比较BP的剂量体积直方图。
我们发现在定性和定量分析中,轮廓勾画者之间存在显著的观察者间变异性。这些在视觉检查时T1神经根以及统计分析时BP体积方面最为明显。BP的体积小于RTOG图谱文章中描述的体积,平均体积为20.8 cc(范围11 - 40.7 cc),而RTOG图谱中的平均体积为33±4 cc(25.1 - 39.4 cc)。接受传统放疗和调强放疗(IMRT)患者的平均剂量、最大剂量、V60Gy、V66Gy和V70Gy的平均值分别为42.2 Gy对44.8 Gy、64.5 Gy对68.5 Gy、6.1%对7.6%、2.9%对- 2.4%和0.6%对0.3%。
这是对已发表方案的首次独立外部评估。我们发现了几个问题,包括显著的观察者间差异。尽管放射肿瘤学家在勾画BP时应避免剂量倾泻,尤其是在使用IMRT时,但使用RTOG图谱时应谨慎。由于BP在CT上大多在放射学上难以显示,我们建议使用术语“臂丛神经区域(BPRs)”来表示BP可能存在的区域。因此,原则上应宽泛地勾画BPRs。