4.7 Article

Multiinstitutional study on target volume delineation variation in breast radiotherapy in the presence of guidelines

期刊

RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY
卷 94, 期 3, 页码 286-291

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2010.01.009

关键词

Interobserver variation; Delineation; Partial breast; Clips; Guidelines; Breast cancer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: This study aims to determine magnitude, causes and consequences of post-operative breast tumour target volume delineation variation among radiation oncologists in the presence of guidelines. Materials and methods: Excision cavities, CTVs and PTVs of eight breast cancer patients were delineated on CT scans by 13 Dutch radiation oncologists (observers) from 12 Dutch institutes participating in the international Young Boost Trial. Delineated volumes and conformity indices were determined. CTV delineation variation (SD) was determined for anatomically relevant regions. Non-parametric statistics were performed to establish effects of observers, patient characteristics and regions on delineation variation. Results: Even in the presence of delineation guidelines considerable delineation variation is present (0.24 < SD < 1.22 cm). Presence of clips or seroma reduced interobserver variation (0.24 < SD < 0.62 cm). Region-specific analysis showed distinct regions of higher variability per patient. This could not always be ascribed to anatomical features, suggesting interobserver variation is not solely clue to lack of image quality. Conclusions: In this study, interobserver delineation variation in breast tumour target volume delineation is larger than, e.g. setup inaccuracies and results from limited reliable visual guidance as well as interpretation differences between observers, despite guidelines. Reduction of delineation variation is essential in view of current developments in planning techniques, particularly for External Partial Breast Irradiation. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Radiotherapy and Oncology 94 (2010) 286-291

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据