Open this publication in new window or tab >>Department of Hematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skane University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics. Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Centre for Biomedical Engineering and Physics (CMTF).
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics. Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Centre for Biomedical Engineering and Physics (CMTF).
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics. Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Centre for Biomedical Engineering and Physics (CMTF).
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics. Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Centre for Biomedical Engineering and Physics (CMTF).
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Biosciences, Pathology.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Oncology.
Department of Hematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skane University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Oncology.
Department of Translational Medicine, Medical Radiation Physics, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Oncology.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Diagnostic Radiology. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Umeå Centre for Functional Brain Imaging (UFBI).
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics. Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Centre for Biomedical Engineering and Physics (CMTF). Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.
Department of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital in Herlev, Herlev, Denmark.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics. Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Centre for Biomedical Engineering and Physics (CMTF).
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Diagnostic Radiology.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics. Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Centre for Biomedical Engineering and Physics (CMTF).
Show others...
2024 (English)In: Acta Oncologica, ISSN 0284-186X, E-ISSN 1651-226X, Vol. 63, p. 503-510Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]
BACKGROUND: The delineation of intraprostatic lesions is vital for correct delivery of focal radiotherapy boost in patients with prostate cancer (PC). Errors in the delineation could translate into reduced tumour control and potentially increase the side effects. The purpose of this study is to compare PET-based delineation methods with histopathology.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population consisted of 15 patients with confirmed high-risk PC intended for prostatectomy. [68Ga]-PSMA-PET/MR was performed prior to surgery. Prostate lesions identified in histopathology were transferred to the in vivo [68Ga]-PSMA-PET/MR coordinate system. Four radiation oncologists manually delineated intraprostatic lesions based on PET data. Various semi-automatic segmentation methods were employed, including absolute and relative thresholds, adaptive threshold, and multi-level Otsu threshold.
RESULTS: The gross tumour volumes (GTVs) delineated by the oncologists showed a moderate level of interobserver agreement with Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) of 0.68. In comparison with histopathology, manual delineations exhibited the highest median DSC and the lowest false discovery rate (FDR) among all approaches. Among semi-automatic approaches, GTVs generated using standardized uptake value (SUV) thresholds above 4 (SUV > 4) demonstrated the highest median DSC (0.41), with 0.51 median lesion coverage ratio, FDR of 0.66 and the 95th percentile of the Hausdorff distance (HD95%) of 8.22 mm.
INTERPRETATION: Manual delineations showed a moderate level of interobserver agreement. Compared to histopathology, manual delineations and SUV > 4 exhibited the highest DSC and the lowest HD95% values. The methods that resulted in a high lesion coverage were associated with a large overestimation of the size of the lesions.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
MJS Publishing, Medical Journals Sweden, 2024
National Category
Cancer and Oncology Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-227761 (URN)10.2340/1651-226X.2024.39041 (DOI)001258458500005 ()38912830 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85197008510 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Cancerforskningsfonden i NorrlandSwedish Cancer SocietyRegion Västerbotten
2024-07-092024-07-092024-07-09Bibliographically approved