The effect of different segmentation methods on primary tumour metabolic volume assessed in 18F-FDG-PET/CT in patients with cervical cancer, for radiotherapy planning

P. Cegła, E. Burchardt, E. Wierzchosławska, A. Roszak, W. Cholewiński
{"title":"The effect of different segmentation methods on primary tumour metabolic volume assessed in 18F-FDG-PET/CT in patients with cervical cancer, for radiotherapy planning","authors":"P. Cegła, E. Burchardt, E. Wierzchosławska, A. Roszak, W. Cholewiński","doi":"10.5114/wo.2019.89248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Gynaecological cancers, including cervical cancer, often require a multidisciplinary approach that includes external beam radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and/or surgical treatment. Biological parameters of the tumour evaluated in 18F-FDG-PET/CT are used for target volume delineation in radiotherapy planning. The choice of segmentation method may affect the assessment of metabolic tumour volume (MTV) in 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Aim of the study To find the optimal segmentation method for the assessment of primary MTV in 18F-FDG-PET/CT in cervical cancer patients for radiotherapy planning. Material and methods Retrospective analysis was performed on a group of 30 patients with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed cervical cancer. The primary MTVs were assessed by SUVmax and SUVmean values; three segmentation methods were used to assess the primary MTV: constant threshold of SUVmax of 2.5, threshold of SUVmax 35%, and threshold of SUV max 45%. The MTVs were compared with the tumour volumes obtained in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which was the “gold standard”, to select the best optimal segmentation method reflecting the tumour size. Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney and t-test were used for statistical analysis. Results Depending on the segmentation method chosen, significant differences in the MTVs were obtained (p < 0.001). The highest volumes were obtained using the method based on constant SUVmax of 2.5, while the smallest in case of threshold of SUVmax of 45%. Regarding the volume determined by MRI, a 35% SUVmax threshold was chosen as the most reliable method. Conclusions The choice of appropriate segmentation method has a significant impact on the primary MTV assessment in 18F-FDG-PET/CT in patients with cervical cancer.","PeriodicalId":10652,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Oncology","volume":"29 1","pages":"183 - 186"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/wo.2019.89248","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Introduction Gynaecological cancers, including cervical cancer, often require a multidisciplinary approach that includes external beam radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and/or surgical treatment. Biological parameters of the tumour evaluated in 18F-FDG-PET/CT are used for target volume delineation in radiotherapy planning. The choice of segmentation method may affect the assessment of metabolic tumour volume (MTV) in 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Aim of the study To find the optimal segmentation method for the assessment of primary MTV in 18F-FDG-PET/CT in cervical cancer patients for radiotherapy planning. Material and methods Retrospective analysis was performed on a group of 30 patients with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed cervical cancer. The primary MTVs were assessed by SUVmax and SUVmean values; three segmentation methods were used to assess the primary MTV: constant threshold of SUVmax of 2.5, threshold of SUVmax 35%, and threshold of SUV max 45%. The MTVs were compared with the tumour volumes obtained in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which was the “gold standard”, to select the best optimal segmentation method reflecting the tumour size. Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney and t-test were used for statistical analysis. Results Depending on the segmentation method chosen, significant differences in the MTVs were obtained (p < 0.001). The highest volumes were obtained using the method based on constant SUVmax of 2.5, while the smallest in case of threshold of SUVmax of 45%. Regarding the volume determined by MRI, a 35% SUVmax threshold was chosen as the most reliable method. Conclusions The choice of appropriate segmentation method has a significant impact on the primary MTV assessment in 18F-FDG-PET/CT in patients with cervical cancer.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
18F-FDG-PET/CT评估不同分割方法对宫颈癌患者原发性肿瘤代谢体积的影响,为放疗规划提供依据
妇科癌症,包括子宫颈癌,通常需要多学科的方法,包括外部放射治疗、化疗和/或手术治疗。18F-FDG-PET/CT评估的肿瘤生物学参数用于放疗计划中靶体积的划定。分割方法的选择可能影响18F-FDG-PET/CT对代谢肿瘤体积(MTV)的评估。目的探讨宫颈癌患者18F-FDG-PET/CT原发性MTV的最佳分割方法,为放疗规划提供依据。材料与方法对30例经组织学证实的新诊断宫颈癌患者进行回顾性分析。用SUVmax和SUVmean评价原发性mtv;采用SUVmax阈值为2.5、SUVmax阈值为35%、SUVmax阈值为45%三种分割方法对主MTV进行评估。将mtv与作为“金标准”的磁共振成像(MRI)获得的肿瘤体积进行比较,以选择反映肿瘤大小的最佳分割方法。采用Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney检验和t检验进行统计分析。结果根据分割方法的不同,获得的mtv有显著差异(p < 0.001)。当SUVmax为2.5时,体积最大,当SUVmax为45%时,体积最小。对于MRI确定的体积,选择35% SUVmax阈值是最可靠的方法。结论选择合适的分割方法对宫颈癌患者18F-FDG-PET/CT的初级MTV评估有重要影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Application of nitroxoline in urologic oncology – a review of evidence Health and coping styles including resources of close family members supporting leukaemia patients Clinicopathological significance of protein disulphide isomerase A3 and phosphorylated signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 in cervical carcinoma High tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes correlate with distinct gene expression profile and favourable survival in single hormone receptor-positive breast cancer The impact of altering the concentration of coffee constituents on their anticancer effect on oral squamous cell carcinoma cell line – in vitro study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1