Display options
Cite
Segedin B, Petric P. Uncertainties in target volume delineation in radiotherapy - are they relevant and what can we do about them?. Radiol Oncol. 2016;50(3):254-62doi: 10.1515/raon-2016-0023.
Segedin, B., & Petric, P. (2016). Uncertainties in target volume delineation in radiotherapy - are they relevant and what can we do about them?. Radiology and oncology, 50(3), 254-62. https://doi.org/10.1515/raon-2016-0023
Segedin, Barbara, and Petric, Primoz. "Uncertainties in target volume delineation in radiotherapy - are they relevant and what can we do about them?." Radiology and oncology vol. 50,3 (2016): 254-62. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/raon-2016-0023
Segedin B, Petric P. Uncertainties in target volume delineation in radiotherapy - are they relevant and what can we do about them?. Radiol Oncol. 2016 May 09;50(3):254-62. doi: 10.1515/raon-2016-0023. eCollection 2016 Sep 01. PMID: 27679540; PMCID: PMC5024655.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Radiol Oncol. 2016 May 09;50(3):254-62. doi: 10.1515/raon-2016-0023. eCollection 2016 Sep 01.

Uncertainties in target volume delineation in radiotherapy - are they relevant and what can we do about them?.

Radiology and oncology

Barbara Segedin, Primoz Petric

Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Slovenia.
  2. Department of Radation Oncology, National Centre for Cancer Care and Research, Doha, Qatar.

PMID: 27679540 PMCID: PMC5024655 DOI: 10.1515/raon-2016-0023

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Modern radiotherapy techniques enable delivery of high doses to the target volume without escalating dose to organs at risk, offering the possibility of better local control while preserving good quality of life. Uncertainties in target volume delineation have been demonstrated for most tumour sites, and various studies indicate that inconsistencies in target volume delineation may be larger than errors in all other steps of the treatment planning and delivery process. The aim of this paper is to summarize the degree of delineation uncertainties for different tumour sites reported in the literature and review the effect of strategies to minimize them.

CONCLUSIONS: Our review confirmed that interobserver variability in target volume contouring represents the largest uncertainty in the process for most tumour sites, potentially resulting in a systematic error in dose delivery, which could influence local control in individual patients. For most tumour sites the optimal combination of imaging modalities for target delineation still needs to be determined. Strict use of delineation guidelines and protocols is advisable both in every day clinical practice and in clinical studies to diminish interobserver variability. Continuing medical education of radiation oncologists cannot be overemphasized, intensive formal training on interpretation of sectional imaging should be included in the program for radiation oncology residents.

Keywords: delineation uncertainties; imaging; interobserver variability; target volume; training

References

  1. Jacobs J Radiat Oncol. 2014 Sep;1(1):006 - PubMed
  2. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Jun 1;71(2):428-34 - PubMed
  3. Strahlenther Onkol. 2011 Jun;187(6):357-66 - PubMed
  4. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Feb 1;64(2):435-48 - PubMed
  5. Acta Oncol. 2013 May;52(4):703-10 - PubMed
  6. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Jul 15;92 (4):911-20 - PubMed
  7. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2005 Jul;15(3):136-45 - PubMed
  8. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Jul 1;68(3):763-70 - PubMed
  9. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003 Dec 1;57(5):1269-79 - PubMed
  10. Radiother Oncol. 2003 Apr;67(1):87-95 - PubMed
  11. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Feb 1;79(2):481-9 - PubMed
  12. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Nov 15;84(4):1037-42 - PubMed
  13. Radiother Oncol. 2005 May;75(2):217-23 - PubMed
  14. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Jan 1;73(1):136-41 - PubMed
  15. Radiother Oncol. 2010 Mar;94(3):286-91 - PubMed
  16. Brachytherapy. 2015 Nov-Dec;14 (6):925-32 - PubMed
  17. Radiother Oncol. 2012 Jan;102(1):14-21 - PubMed
  18. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Nov 1;81(3):804-11 - PubMed
  19. Cancer Radiother. 2014 Mar;18(2):89-96 - PubMed
  20. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2016 Apr;60(2):255-9 - PubMed
  21. Radiat Oncol. 2011 Sep 19;6:118 - PubMed
  22. Strahlenther Onkol. 2005 Jul;181(7):424-30 - PubMed
  23. Radiother Oncol. 2000 Jul;56(1):73-83 - PubMed
  24. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003 Oct 1;57(2):481-8 - PubMed
  25. Strahlenther Onkol. 2003 Jan;179(1):21-30 - PubMed
  26. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Feb 1;79(2):348-55 - PubMed
  27. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001 Aug 1;50(5):1366-72 - PubMed
  28. Radiat Oncol. 2010 Mar 15;5:21 - PubMed
  29. Radiology. 2004 Oct;233(1):93-100 - PubMed
  30. Radiother Oncol. 2012 May;103(2):178-82 - PubMed
  31. Radiother Oncol. 2013 Apr;107(1):1-5 - PubMed
  32. Ann Nucl Med. 2007 Dec;21(10 ):553-62 - PubMed
  33. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999 Jan 1;43(1):57-66 - PubMed
  34. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Jul 15;92 (4):874-83 - PubMed
  35. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2010 Aug;9(4):393-8 - PubMed
  36. Br J Radiol. 2013 Apr;86(1024):20120398 - PubMed
  37. Strahlenther Onkol. 2015 Jun;191(6):525-33 - PubMed
  38. Radiother Oncol. 2013 Apr;107(1):13-9 - PubMed
  39. Radiother Oncol. 2005 Nov;77(2):182-90 - PubMed
  40. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Jan 1;82(1):435-41.e1 - PubMed
  41. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Oct 1;66(2):372-6 - PubMed
  42. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998 Sep 1;42(2):277-88 - PubMed
  43. Radiother Oncol. 2005 Oct;77(1):25-31 - PubMed
  44. Radiother Oncol. 2014 Jan;110(1):172-81 - PubMed
  45. Radiother Oncol. 2001 Jul;60(1):49-59 - PubMed
  46. Radiother Oncol. 2013 Apr;107(1):6-12 - PubMed
  47. Radiother Oncol. 2002 Jan;62(1):37-49 - PubMed
  48. Radiat Oncol. 2008 Dec 09;3:41 - PubMed
  49. Radiother Oncol. 1993 Nov;29(2):169-75 - PubMed
  50. Med Phys. 2013 Apr;40(4):040601 - PubMed
  51. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Jul 1;53(3):566-73 - PubMed
  52. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2009 Apr;21(3):204-17 - PubMed
  53. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Feb 1;82(2):e265-72 - PubMed
  54. Radiother Oncol. 2005 Mar;74(3):235-45 - PubMed
  55. Radiother Oncol. 2012 Apr;103(1):92-8 - PubMed
  56. Radiother Oncol. 2005 Sep;76(3):293-9 - PubMed
  57. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Apr 1;82(5):1923-9 - PubMed
  58. Radiother Oncol. 2012 Mar;102(3):371-6 - PubMed
  59. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Mar 15;82(4):1332-40 - PubMed
  60. Strahlenther Onkol. 2012 Feb;188(2):160-7 - PubMed
  61. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Jul 15;77(4):1166-70 - PubMed
  62. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Oct 1;54(2):457-61 - PubMed
  63. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Nov 15;75(4):990-3 - PubMed
  64. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005 May 1;62(1):70-5 - PubMed
  65. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Feb 1;76(2):379-85 - PubMed
  66. Radiol Oncol. 2012 Sep;46(3):242-51 - PubMed
  67. Radiother Oncol. 2002 Jan;62(1):27-36 - PubMed
  68. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2007 Feb;6(1):31-6 - PubMed
  69. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013 Aug;40(8):1233-44 - PubMed
  70. Radiother Oncol. 1999 Dec;53(3):247-55 - PubMed
  71. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 May 1;83(1):220-7 - PubMed
  72. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999 Jul 1;44(4):931-5 - PubMed
  73. Radiother Oncol. 2011 Jul;100(1):116-23 - PubMed
  74. Australas Radiol. 1990 Nov;34(4):288-92 - PubMed
  75. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995 Jan 1;31(1):109-12 - PubMed

Publication Types