Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Li, X. Allen, Ph.D
• Tai, An, Ph.D
• Arthur, Douglas W., M.D
• Buchholz, Thomas A., M.D
• Macdonald, Shannon, M.D
• Marks, Lawrence B., M.D
• Moran, Jean M., Ph.D
• Pierce, Lori J., M.D
• Rabinovitch, Rachel, M.D
• Taghian, Alphonse, M.D., Ph.D
• Vicini, Frank, M.D
• Woodward, Wendy, M.D., Ph.D
• White, Julia R., M.D

Titel

Variability of Target and Normal Structure Delineation for Breast Cancer Radiotherapy: An RTOG Multi-Institutional and Multiobserver Study

Ist Teil von

• International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2009-03, Vol.73 (3), p.944-951

Ort / Verlag

United States: Elsevier Inc

Erscheinungsjahr

2009

Quelle

Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Purpose To quantify the multi-institutional and multiobserver variability of target and organ-at-risk (OAR) delineation for breast-cancer radiotherapy (RT) and its dosimetric impact as the first step of a Radiation Therapy Oncology Group effort to establish a breast cancer atlas. Methods and Materials Nine radiation oncologists specializing in breast RT from eight institutions independently delineated targets ( e.g., lumpectomy cavity, boost planning target volume, breast, supraclavicular, axillary and internal mammary nodes, chest wall) and OARs ( e.g., heart, lung) on the same CT images of three representative breast cancer patients. Interobserver differences in structure delineation were quantified regarding volume, distance between centers of mass, percent overlap, and average surface distance. Mean, median, and standard deviation for these quantities were calculated for all possible combinations. To assess the impact of these variations on treatment planning, representative dosimetric plans based on observer-specific contours were generated. Results Variability in contouring the targets and OARs between the institutions and observers was substantial. Structure overlaps were as low as 10%, and volume variations had standard deviations up to 60%. The large variability was related both to differences in opinion regarding target and OAR boundaries and approach to incorporation of setup uncertainty and dosimetric limitations in target delineation. These interobserver differences result in substantial variations in dosimetric planning for breast RT. Conclusions Differences in target and OAR delineation for breast irradiation between institutions/observers appear to be clinically and dosimetrically significant. A systematic consensus is highly desirable, particularly in the era of intensity-modulated and image-guided RT.