FDG-PET-CT reduces the interobserver variability in rectal tumor delineation.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previously, we showed a good correlation between pathology and an automatically generated PET-contour in rectal cancer. This study analyzed the effect of the use of PET-CT scan on the interobserver variation in GTV definition in rectal cancer and the influence of PET-CT on treatment volumes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty two patients diagnosed with rectal cancer underwent an FDG-PET-CT for radiotherapy planning. An automatic contour was created on PET-scan using the source-to-background ratio. The GTV was delineated by 5 observers in 3 rounds: using CT and MRI, using CT, MRI and PET and using CT, MRI and PET auto-contour. GTV volumes were compared and concordance indices (CI) were calculated. Since the GTV is only a small portion of the treatment volume in rectal cancer, a separate analysis was performed to evaluate the influence of PET on the definition of the CTV used in daily clinical practice and the caudal extension of the treatment volumes. RESULTS: GTV volumes based on PET were significantly smaller. CIs increased significantly using PET and the best interobserver agreement was observed using PET auto-contours. Furthermore, we found that in up to 29% of patients the CTV based on PET extended outside the CTV used in clinical practice. The caudal border of the treatment volume can be tailored using PET-scan in low seated tumors. Influence of PET on the position of the caudal border was most pronounced in high seated tumors. CONCLUSION: PET-CT increases the interobserver agreement in the GTV definition in rectal cancer, helps to avoid geographical misses and allows tailoring the caudal border of the treatment volume.

FDG-PET provides the best correlation with the tumor specimen compared to MRI and CT in rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare CT-, MR- and PET-CT based tumor length measurements in rectal cancer with pathology. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-six rectal cancer patients underwent both MR and PET-CT imaging followed by short-course radiotherapy (RT 5×5 Gy) and surgery within 3 days after RT. Tumor length was measured manually and independently by 2 observers on CT, MR and PET. PET-based tumor length measurements were also generated automatically using the signal-to-background-ratio (SBR) method. All measurements were correlated with the tumor length on the pathological specimen. RESULTS: CT-based measurements did not show a valuable correlation with pathology. MR-based measurements correlated only weakly, but still significantly (Pearson correlation=0.55 resp. 0.57; p<0.001). Manual PET measurements reached a good correlation with pathology, but less strong (Pearson correlation 0.72 and 0.76 for the two different observers) than automatic PET-CT based measurements, which provided the best correlation with pathology (Pearson correlation of 0.91 (p<0.001)). Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated in general an overestimation of the tumor diameter using manual measurements, while the agreement of automatic contours and pathology was within acceptable ranges. A direct comparison of the different modalities revealed a significant better precision for PET-based auto-contours as compared to all other measurements. CONCLUSION: Automatically generated PET-CT based contours show the best correlation with the surgical specimen and thus provide a useful and powerful tool to accurately determine the largest tumor dimension in rectal cancer. This could be used as a quick and reliable tool for target delineation in radiotherapy. However, a 3D volume analysis is needed to confirm these results.