1. Tumor volume definitions in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma - Comparing PET/MRI and histopathology.
- Author
-
Terzidis E, Friborg J, Vogelius IR, Lelkaitis G, von Buchwald C, Olin AB, Johannesen HH, Fischer BM, Wessel I, and Rasmussen JH
- Subjects
- Humans, Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck diagnostic imaging, Tumor Burden, Positron-Emission Tomography methods, Magnetic Resonance Imaging methods, Fluorodeoxyglucose F18, Radiopharmaceuticals, Tomography, X-Ray Computed methods, Head and Neck Neoplasms diagnostic imaging
- Abstract
Background and Purpose: In cancer treatment precise definition of the tumor volume is essential, but despite development in imaging modalities, this remains a challenge. Here, pathological tumor volumes from the surgical specimens were obtained and compared to tumor volumes defined from modern PET/MRI hybrid imaging. The purpose is to evaluate mismatch between the volumes defined from imaging and pathology was estimated and potential clinical impact., Methods and Materials: Twenty-five patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma were scanned on an integrated PET/MRI system prior to surgery. Three gross tumor volumes (GTVs) from the primary tumor site were delineated defined from MRI (GTV
MRI ), PET (GTVPET ) and one by utilizing both anatomical images and clinical information (GTVONCO ). Twenty-five primary tumor specimens were extracted en bloc, scanned with PET/MRI and co-registered to the patient images. Each specimen was sectioned in blocks, sliced and stained with haematoxylin and eosin. All slices were digitalized and tumor delineated by a head and neck pathologist. The pathological tumor areas in all slices were interpolated yielding a pathological 3D tumor volume (GTVPATO ). GTVPATO was compared with the imaging GTV's and potential mismatch was estimated., Results: Thirteen patients were included. The mean volume of GTVONCO was larger than the GTV's defined from PET or MRI. The mean mismatch of the GTVPATO compared to the GTVPET , GTVMRI and GTVONCO was 31.9 %, 54.5 % and 27.9 % respectively, and the entire GTVPATO was only fully encompassed in GTVONCO in 1 of 13 patients. However, after the addition of a clinical 5 mm margin the GTVPATO was fully encompassed in GTVONCO in 11 out of 13 patients., Conclusions: Despite modern hybrid imaging modalities, a mismatch between imaging and pathological defined tumor volumes was observed in all patients.A 5 mm clinical margin was sufficient to ensure inclusion of the entire pathological volume in 11 out of 13 patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF