Comparison of Fused MRI/CT-Based Contouring and CT-Based Contouring in Helical Tomotherapy for Rectal Cancer

Document Type : Original Article(s)

Authors

1 MSc Student, Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

2 Professor, Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

3 Associate Professor, Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: Due to the limitations of CT imaging, it is necessary to use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a complementary method in the treatment planning process. This study aimed to compare contouring and treatment planning based on MRI/CT images with contouring and treatment planning based on CT images in the treatment of rectal cancer using helical tomotherapy.
Methods: In this prospective study, 12 patients with rectal cancer underwent MRI diagnostic imaging and CT imaging was also performed at an interval of one day. The contouring process was performed for each patient based on both methods. After that, a dose of 45 Gy was delivered to the planning target volume (PTV). Finally, the size of the treatment volumes and the parameters Dmean, V45, HI, CI, and D98% were extracted and compared from the treatment planning system.
Findings: CT-based contouring method compared to MRI/CT-based method showed higher averages for treatment volumes. In addition, in CT-based plans compared to MRI/CT-based plans, the average CI, V45, and D98% were significantly lower and the average HI was significantly higher.
Conclusion: The results of this study show that contouring based on MRI/CT images can estimate the size of treatment volumes smaller than contouring based on CT. Also, treatment plans based on MRI/CT images can provide more appropriate dose coverage for PTV.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Goding Sauer A, Fedewa SA, Butterly LF, Anderson JC, et al. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin 2020; 70(3): 145-64.
  2. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71(3): 209-49.
  3. Kye BH, Cho HM. Coloproctology Overview of Radiation Therapy for Treating Rectal Cancer. Ann Coloproctol 2014; 30(4): 165-74.
  4. Joye I, Haustermans K. Early and late toxicity of radiotherapy for rectal cancer. Recent Results Cancer Res 2014; 203: 189-201.
  5. Yu M, Jang HS, Jeon DM, Cheon GS, Lee HC, Chung MJ, et al. Dosimetric evaluation of Tomotherapy and four-box field conformal radiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. Radiat Oncol J 2013; 31(4): 252-9.
  6. Roeder F, Meldolesi E, Gerum S, Valentini V, Rödel C. Recent advances in (chemo-) radiation therapy for rectal cancer: a comprehensive review. Radiat Oncol 2020; 15(1): 262.
  7. Kuran S, Ozin Y, Nessar G, Turhan N, Sasmaz N. Is endorectal ultrasound still useful for staging rectal cancer. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2014; 18(19): 2857-62.
  8. Metcalfe P, Liney GP, Holloway L, Walker A, Barton M, Delaney GP, et al. The potential for an enhanced role for MRI in radiation-therapy treatment planning. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2013; 12(5): 429-46.
  9. Đan I, Petrović B, Erak M, Nikolić I, Lučić S. Radiotherapy treatment planning: benefits of CT-MR image registration and fusion in tumor volume delineation. Vojnosanit Pregl 2013; 70(8): 735-9.
  10. Tan J, Joon DL, Fitt G, Wada M, Joon ML, Mercuri A, et al. The utility of multimodality imaging with CT and MRI in defining rectal tumour volumes for radiotherapy treatment planning : a pilot study. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2010; 54(6): 562-8.
  11. Bird D, Nix MG, Mccallum H, Teo M, Gilbert A, Casanova N, et al. The benefit of MR-only radiotherapy treatment planning for anal and rectal cancers : A planning study. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2021; 22(11): 41-53.
  12. Gwynne S, Mukherjee S, Webster R, Spezi E, Staffurth J, Coles B, et al. Imaging for target volume delineation in rectal cancer radiotherapy - a systematic review. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2012; 24(1): 52-63.
  13. Oh S, Kim S. Deformable image registration in radiation therapy. Radiat Oncol J 2017; 35(2): 101-11.
  14. Myerson RJ, Garofalo MC, El Naqa I, Abrams RA, Apte A, Bosch WR, et al. Elective clinical target volumes for conformal therapy in anorectal cancer: a radiation therapy oncology group consensus panel contouring atlas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;
    74(3): 824-30.
  15. Shaw E, Kline R, Gillin M, Souhami L, Hirschfeld A, Dinapoli R, et al. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group: radiosurgery quality assurance guidelines. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993; 27(5): 1231-9.
  16. Feuvret L, Noël G, Mazeron JJ, Bey P. Conformity index: A review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 64(2): 333-42.
  17. Wang YY, Zhe H. Clinical application of multimodality imaging in radiotherapy treatment planning for rectal cancer. Cancer Imaging 2013; 13(4): 495-501.
  18. White I, Hunt A, Bird T, Settatree S, Soliman H, Mcquaid D, et al. Interobserver variability in target volume delineation for CT/MRI simulation and MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy in rectal cancer. Br J Radiol 2021; 94(1128): 20210350.
  19. O’Neill BDP, Salerno G, Thomas K, Tait DM, Brown G. MR vs CT imaging: Low rectal cancer tumour delineation for three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy. Br J Radiol 2009; 82(978): 509-13.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 41, Issue 708
4th Week, April
March and April 2023
Pages 89-95

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 28 January 2023
  • Accept Date: 03 April 2023

Share

How to cite

Statistics