Prospective randomized double-blind pilot study of site-specific consensus atlas implementation for rectal cancer target volume delineation in the cooperative group setting

Clifton D. Fuller, Jasper Nijkamp, Joop C. Duppen, Coen R N Rasch, Charles R. Thomas, Samuel J. Wang, Paul Okunieff, William Jones, Daniel Baseman, Shilpen Patel, Carlo G N Demandante, Anna M. Harris, Benjamin D. Smith, Alan W. Katz, Camille McGann, Jennifer L. Harper, Daniel T. Chang, Stephen Smalley, David T. Marshall, Karyn A. Goodman & 2 others Nikos Papanikolaou, Lisa A. Kachnic

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

53 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Variations in target volume delineation represent a significant hurdle in clinical trials involving conformal radiotherapy. We sought to determine the effect of a consensus guideline-based visual atlas on contouring the target volumes. Methods and Materials: A representative case was contoured (Scan 1) by 14 physician observers and a reference expert with and without target volume delineation instructions derived from a proposed rectal cancer clinical trial involving conformal radiotherapy. The gross tumor volume (GTV), and two clinical target volumes (CTVA, including the internal iliac, presacral, and perirectal nodes, and CTVB, which included the external iliac nodes) were contoured. The observers were randomly assigned to receipt (Group A) or nonreceipt (Group B) of a consensus guideline and atlas for anorectal cancers and then instructed to recontour the same case/images (Scan 2). Observer variation was analyzed volumetrically using the conformation number (CN, where CN = 1 equals total agreement). Results: Of 14 evaluable contour sets (1 expert and 7 Group A and 6 Group B observers), greater agreement was found for the GTV (mean CN, 0.75) than for the CTVs (mean CN, 0.46-0.65). Atlas exposure for Group A led to significantly increased interobserver agreement for CTVA (mean initial CN, 0.68, after atlas use, 0.76; p = .03) and increased agreement with the expert reference (initial mean CN, 0.58; after atlas use, 0.69; p = .02). For the GTV and CTVB, neither the interobserver nor the expert agreement was altered after atlas exposure. Conclusion: Consensus guideline atlas implementation resulted in a detectable difference in interobserver agreement and a greater approximation of expert volumes for the CTVA but not for the GTV or CTVB in the specified case. Visual atlas inclusion should be considered as a feature in future clinical trials incorporating conformal RT.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)481-489
Number of pages9
JournalInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
Volume79
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2011

Fingerprint

delineation
Atlases
Rectal Neoplasms
Double-Blind Method
cancer
Tumor Burden
tumors
Conformal Radiotherapy
Clinical Trials
Guidelines
radiation therapy
Observer Variation
physicians
education
Physicians
inclusions

Keywords

  • Atlas
  • Conformal radiotherapy
  • Consensus guideline
  • Cooperative group
  • Target volume delineation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiation
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

Prospective randomized double-blind pilot study of site-specific consensus atlas implementation for rectal cancer target volume delineation in the cooperative group setting. / Fuller, Clifton D.; Nijkamp, Jasper; Duppen, Joop C.; Rasch, Coen R N; Thomas, Charles R.; Wang, Samuel J.; Okunieff, Paul; Jones, William; Baseman, Daniel; Patel, Shilpen; Demandante, Carlo G N; Harris, Anna M.; Smith, Benjamin D.; Katz, Alan W.; McGann, Camille; Harper, Jennifer L.; Chang, Daniel T.; Smalley, Stephen; Marshall, David T.; Goodman, Karyn A.; Papanikolaou, Nikos; Kachnic, Lisa A.

In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, Vol. 79, No. 2, 01.02.2011, p. 481-489.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Fuller, CD, Nijkamp, J, Duppen, JC, Rasch, CRN, Thomas, CR, Wang, SJ, Okunieff, P, Jones, W, Baseman, D, Patel, S, Demandante, CGN, Harris, AM, Smith, BD, Katz, AW, McGann, C, Harper, JL, Chang, DT, Smalley, S, Marshall, DT, Goodman, KA, Papanikolaou, N & Kachnic, LA 2011, 'Prospective randomized double-blind pilot study of site-specific consensus atlas implementation for rectal cancer target volume delineation in the cooperative group setting', International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 481-489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.11.012
Fuller, Clifton D. ; Nijkamp, Jasper ; Duppen, Joop C. ; Rasch, Coen R N ; Thomas, Charles R. ; Wang, Samuel J. ; Okunieff, Paul ; Jones, William ; Baseman, Daniel ; Patel, Shilpen ; Demandante, Carlo G N ; Harris, Anna M. ; Smith, Benjamin D. ; Katz, Alan W. ; McGann, Camille ; Harper, Jennifer L. ; Chang, Daniel T. ; Smalley, Stephen ; Marshall, David T. ; Goodman, Karyn A. ; Papanikolaou, Nikos ; Kachnic, Lisa A. / Prospective randomized double-blind pilot study of site-specific consensus atlas implementation for rectal cancer target volume delineation in the cooperative group setting. In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 2011 ; Vol. 79, No. 2. pp. 481-489.
@article{ae8b2cdd032445aeaf74236a37bc2fee,
title = "Prospective randomized double-blind pilot study of site-specific consensus atlas implementation for rectal cancer target volume delineation in the cooperative group setting",
abstract = "Purpose: Variations in target volume delineation represent a significant hurdle in clinical trials involving conformal radiotherapy. We sought to determine the effect of a consensus guideline-based visual atlas on contouring the target volumes. Methods and Materials: A representative case was contoured (Scan 1) by 14 physician observers and a reference expert with and without target volume delineation instructions derived from a proposed rectal cancer clinical trial involving conformal radiotherapy. The gross tumor volume (GTV), and two clinical target volumes (CTVA, including the internal iliac, presacral, and perirectal nodes, and CTVB, which included the external iliac nodes) were contoured. The observers were randomly assigned to receipt (Group A) or nonreceipt (Group B) of a consensus guideline and atlas for anorectal cancers and then instructed to recontour the same case/images (Scan 2). Observer variation was analyzed volumetrically using the conformation number (CN, where CN = 1 equals total agreement). Results: Of 14 evaluable contour sets (1 expert and 7 Group A and 6 Group B observers), greater agreement was found for the GTV (mean CN, 0.75) than for the CTVs (mean CN, 0.46-0.65). Atlas exposure for Group A led to significantly increased interobserver agreement for CTVA (mean initial CN, 0.68, after atlas use, 0.76; p = .03) and increased agreement with the expert reference (initial mean CN, 0.58; after atlas use, 0.69; p = .02). For the GTV and CTVB, neither the interobserver nor the expert agreement was altered after atlas exposure. Conclusion: Consensus guideline atlas implementation resulted in a detectable difference in interobserver agreement and a greater approximation of expert volumes for the CTVA but not for the GTV or CTVB in the specified case. Visual atlas inclusion should be considered as a feature in future clinical trials incorporating conformal RT.",
keywords = "Atlas, Conformal radiotherapy, Consensus guideline, Cooperative group, Target volume delineation",
author = "Fuller, {Clifton D.} and Jasper Nijkamp and Duppen, {Joop C.} and Rasch, {Coen R N} and Thomas, {Charles R.} and Wang, {Samuel J.} and Paul Okunieff and William Jones and Daniel Baseman and Shilpen Patel and Demandante, {Carlo G N} and Harris, {Anna M.} and Smith, {Benjamin D.} and Katz, {Alan W.} and Camille McGann and Harper, {Jennifer L.} and Chang, {Daniel T.} and Stephen Smalley and Marshall, {David T.} and Goodman, {Karyn A.} and Nikos Papanikolaou and Kachnic, {Lisa A.}",
year = "2011",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.11.012",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "79",
pages = "481--489",
journal = "International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics",
issn = "0360-3016",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prospective randomized double-blind pilot study of site-specific consensus atlas implementation for rectal cancer target volume delineation in the cooperative group setting

AU - Fuller, Clifton D.

AU - Nijkamp, Jasper

AU - Duppen, Joop C.

AU - Rasch, Coen R N

AU - Thomas, Charles R.

AU - Wang, Samuel J.

AU - Okunieff, Paul

AU - Jones, William

AU - Baseman, Daniel

AU - Patel, Shilpen

AU - Demandante, Carlo G N

AU - Harris, Anna M.

AU - Smith, Benjamin D.

AU - Katz, Alan W.

AU - McGann, Camille

AU - Harper, Jennifer L.

AU - Chang, Daniel T.

AU - Smalley, Stephen

AU - Marshall, David T.

AU - Goodman, Karyn A.

AU - Papanikolaou, Nikos

AU - Kachnic, Lisa A.

PY - 2011/2/1

Y1 - 2011/2/1

N2 - Purpose: Variations in target volume delineation represent a significant hurdle in clinical trials involving conformal radiotherapy. We sought to determine the effect of a consensus guideline-based visual atlas on contouring the target volumes. Methods and Materials: A representative case was contoured (Scan 1) by 14 physician observers and a reference expert with and without target volume delineation instructions derived from a proposed rectal cancer clinical trial involving conformal radiotherapy. The gross tumor volume (GTV), and two clinical target volumes (CTVA, including the internal iliac, presacral, and perirectal nodes, and CTVB, which included the external iliac nodes) were contoured. The observers were randomly assigned to receipt (Group A) or nonreceipt (Group B) of a consensus guideline and atlas for anorectal cancers and then instructed to recontour the same case/images (Scan 2). Observer variation was analyzed volumetrically using the conformation number (CN, where CN = 1 equals total agreement). Results: Of 14 evaluable contour sets (1 expert and 7 Group A and 6 Group B observers), greater agreement was found for the GTV (mean CN, 0.75) than for the CTVs (mean CN, 0.46-0.65). Atlas exposure for Group A led to significantly increased interobserver agreement for CTVA (mean initial CN, 0.68, after atlas use, 0.76; p = .03) and increased agreement with the expert reference (initial mean CN, 0.58; after atlas use, 0.69; p = .02). For the GTV and CTVB, neither the interobserver nor the expert agreement was altered after atlas exposure. Conclusion: Consensus guideline atlas implementation resulted in a detectable difference in interobserver agreement and a greater approximation of expert volumes for the CTVA but not for the GTV or CTVB in the specified case. Visual atlas inclusion should be considered as a feature in future clinical trials incorporating conformal RT.

AB - Purpose: Variations in target volume delineation represent a significant hurdle in clinical trials involving conformal radiotherapy. We sought to determine the effect of a consensus guideline-based visual atlas on contouring the target volumes. Methods and Materials: A representative case was contoured (Scan 1) by 14 physician observers and a reference expert with and without target volume delineation instructions derived from a proposed rectal cancer clinical trial involving conformal radiotherapy. The gross tumor volume (GTV), and two clinical target volumes (CTVA, including the internal iliac, presacral, and perirectal nodes, and CTVB, which included the external iliac nodes) were contoured. The observers were randomly assigned to receipt (Group A) or nonreceipt (Group B) of a consensus guideline and atlas for anorectal cancers and then instructed to recontour the same case/images (Scan 2). Observer variation was analyzed volumetrically using the conformation number (CN, where CN = 1 equals total agreement). Results: Of 14 evaluable contour sets (1 expert and 7 Group A and 6 Group B observers), greater agreement was found for the GTV (mean CN, 0.75) than for the CTVs (mean CN, 0.46-0.65). Atlas exposure for Group A led to significantly increased interobserver agreement for CTVA (mean initial CN, 0.68, after atlas use, 0.76; p = .03) and increased agreement with the expert reference (initial mean CN, 0.58; after atlas use, 0.69; p = .02). For the GTV and CTVB, neither the interobserver nor the expert agreement was altered after atlas exposure. Conclusion: Consensus guideline atlas implementation resulted in a detectable difference in interobserver agreement and a greater approximation of expert volumes for the CTVA but not for the GTV or CTVB in the specified case. Visual atlas inclusion should be considered as a feature in future clinical trials incorporating conformal RT.

KW - Atlas

KW - Conformal radiotherapy

KW - Consensus guideline

KW - Cooperative group

KW - Target volume delineation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78650838231&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78650838231&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.11.012

DO - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.11.012

M3 - Article

VL - 79

SP - 481

EP - 489

JO - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

JF - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

SN - 0360-3016

IS - 2

ER -