Comparison of Computed Tomography- and Positron Emission Tomography-Based Radiotherapy Planning in Cholangiocarcinoma

Onal C., Topuk S., Yapar A. F., Yavuz M., Topkan E., Yavuz A.

ONKOLOGIE, cilt.36, sa.9, ss.484-490, 2013 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 36 Sayı: 9
  • Basım Tarihi: 2013
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1159/000354630
  • Dergi Adı: ONKOLOGIE
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.484-490
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Cholangiocarcinoma, Extrahepatic, Positron emission tomography, Radiotherapy, Target volume delineation, CELL LUNG-CANCER, STEREOTACTIC BODY RADIOTHERAPY, PET-CT, RADIATION-THERAPY, ESOPHAGEAL, CARCINOMA, TUMOR, CHEMORADIATION, DIAGNOSIS, VOLUMES
  • Akdeniz Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare computed tomography (CT)- and positron emission tomography (PET)/CT-based gross tumor volume (GTV) delineation and its subsequent expansion to the planning target volume (PTV), and to analyze the resultant doses of 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) to critical organs. Methods: 15 patients with unresectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHCC) were enrolled into this study. PTVCT-based plans were initially made, and then PTVPET-CT-based plans were created using the same beam angles and isocenter. The dosimetric parameters analyzed included GTV(CT), PTVCT, GTV(PET-CT) and PTVPET-CT. Prescribed and delivered radiation doses to target volumes and delineated organs at risk were also compared. Results: Mean GTV and PTV were significantly reduced in the PET/CT-based plan compared to the CT-based plan; the mean reductions of GTV and PTV were 28.7% and 15.2%, respectively. The mean value for GTV(PET)/GTV(CT) mismatch was 49.5 +/- 28.9%, and that for GTV(CT)/GTV(PET) was 95.9 +/- 19.5%. The mean value for PTVPET-CT/PTVCT mismatch was 21.9 +/- 7.0% and that for PTVCT/PTVPET-CT was 39.1 +/- 9.2%. Liver doses were significantly reduced (17.1%) in the PET/CT-based plan compared to the CT-based plan; the doses received by at least 30% and 50% of the liver were 30.0%, and 27.3%, respectively. Conclusion: The potential benefit of PET/CT is the reduction in geographic misses and regional treatment failures associated with CT-based planning.