Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T20:02:57.998Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Improving the accuracy of localisation in the radiotherapy treatment of head and neck, and brain cancer: some initial findings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 August 2006

M. J. McJury
Affiliation:
Department of Radiotherapy Physics, Weston Park Hospital, Whitham Road, Sheffield
R. Nakielny
Affiliation:
Department of Radiology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield
D. Levy
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, Weston Park Hospital, Whitham Road, Sheffield
J. Lilley
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Physics, Cookridge Hospital, Leeds
J. Conway
Affiliation:
Department of Radiotherapy Physics, Weston Park Hospital, Whitham Road, Sheffield
M. H. Robinson
Affiliation:
Department of YCR Clinical Oncology, Weston Park Hospital, Whitham Road, Sheffield

Abstract

Aims: To investigate the impact on localisation of utilising contrast enhanced computed tomography (CT) scans and the formal input of a radiologist in the radiotherapy planning process.

Method: Ten head and neck / brain patients had pre- and post-contrast CT scans in the treatment position. Over several months, their unenhanced and enhanced scans were re-contoured by the original oncologist, and a radiologist. These new contours were compared to the original unenhanced contours and differences in contour volume, geographical position and tolerance doses on the associated PTVs were evaluated.

Results: The use of contrast lead to significant differences in the size of GTVs. Mean differences in GTVs of 32.8 % were significant at p=0.01. No significant impact on the position of the contour centre was noted. The impact of the radiologist lead to large differences in GTV (mean 20.5 %), but large SDs meant this result was not statistically significant. The contouring precision of the oncologist showed no significant difference for GTVs and PTVs.

Conclusions: The use of contrast when planning the radiotherapy treatment for head and neck / brain patients was found to lead to significant differences in GTV size, a lesser effect on PTV definition and little impact on the position of the contour centre. It may have important implications for multi-phase treatments where the GTV (rather than the PTV) is targeted for boost doses. Differences due to the input of a radiologist appear to be considerable and require further investigation when additional patient numbers have been acquired to improve precision.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
2000 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)