HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Biehl, K. J. Articles by Bradley, J. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Biehl, K. J. Articles by Bradley, J.

Reply: Dynamic Threshold for Radiation Target Volume by PET/CT

Washington University School of Medicine St. Louis, Missouri

REPLY: We thank our fellow researchers for their interest in our recent publication. The variable-threshold methods described in several studies are novel ways to determine gross tumor volume (GTV) for treatment planning with ¹⁸F-FDG PET (1–3). We agree that care must be taken in implementing this new technology, especially in the case of lung tumors for which no true gold standard for review of tumor volumes has been defined.

In our review of 20 peripheral non–small cell lung cancer lesions without atelectasis, we believed that the GTV defined by reports 50 and 62 of the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements was the best surrogate for a gold standard (4,5). The decision to model PET tumor volume on CT tumor volume for a one-to-one correlation defines the minimum volume to be treated using PET. We recognize that volumes defined for smaller tumors with PET may be a representation of tumor motion rather than tumor biology. The significance of this possibility has not yet been determined. Clinical judgment must be used in extending these findings to individual treatment plans, including cases with atelectasis or small tumors.

As we previously stated, Poisson distribution of pixel intensity does make the use of maximum SUV a somewhat less reliable starting point for tumor delineation. Maximum SUV, however, is an important biologic tumor parameter and yields essential information. Consider the scenario of a case of lung cancer with adjacent atelectasis. PET may be most helpful in the atelectatic lung when CT-based GTV is difficult to determine. An iterative process as described by Black et al. (2) may be useful in this scenario. However, the mild to moderate ¹⁸F-FDG uptake within the inflamed, atelectatic lung may alter the mean SUV and cause the inclusion of excess normal tissue.

Black et al. (2) described an alternate method for delineating PET-based GTV based on mean SUV derived from experiments involving stationary spheres. Although stationary spheres filled with ¹⁸F-FDG may serve as an adequate model for tumors without significant motion during treatment, Caldwell et al. (6) have shown that such spheres are inadequate for modeling tumors throughout respiratory motion. Furthermore, the limitation of a mean SUV of greater than 2 would have excluded half the tumors in our study. Models derived from stationary spheres should not be applied to clinical management of the respiratory system or of other systems subject to significant motion. Any model based on spheres must be examined with scrutiny because tumor heterogeneity is difficult to model.

For these reasons, our clinically derived model based on GTV generated from CT seems a more robust method to determine tumor extent on PET. Our current recommendations are to contour the lung tumor using 4-dimensional CT and to use ¹⁸F-FDG PET to clarify tumor versus no tumor or to clarify the distinction of tumor from surrounding atelectasis.

FOOTNOTES

COPYRIGHT © 2007 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.

References

1. Biehl KJ, Kong F-M, Dehdashti F, et al. ¹⁸F-FDG PET definition of gross tumor volume for radiotherapy of non-small cell lung cancer: is a single standardized uptake value threshold approach appropriate? J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1808–1812.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2. Black QC, Grills IS, Kestin LL, et al. Defining a radiotherapy target with positron emission tomography. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;60:1272–1282.[CrossRef][Medline]
3. Daisne J, Duprez T, Weynand B, et al. Tumor volume in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma: comparison at CT, MR imaging, and FDG PET and validation with surgical specimen. Radiology. 2004;233:93–100.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. ICRU Report 50: Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Photon Beam Therapy. Bethesda, MD: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements; 1993.
5. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. ICRU Report 62: Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Photon Beam Therapy (supplement to ICRU Report 50). Bethesda, MD: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements; 1999.
6. Caldwell CB, Mah K, Skinner M, Danjoux CE. Can PET provide the 3D extent of tumor motion for individualized internal target volumes? A phantom study of the limitations of CT and the promise of PET. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55:1381–1393.[CrossRef][Medline]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. R. Patel, J. F. Perz, A. E. Fiore, and A. D. Castel Preventing Blood Contamination in Nuclear Pharmacies: Lessons from an Outbreak of Hepatitis C Virus Infections and Contaminated 99mTc-Sestamibi J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2007; 48(11): 1911 - 1912. [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Biehl, K. J. Articles by Bradley, J. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Biehl, K. J. Articles by Bradley, J.