Dataset Information

Geometric contour variation in clinical target volume of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer radiotherapy: an AIRO multi-institutional study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To determine interobserver variability in axillary nodal contouring in breast cancer (BC) radiotherapy (RT) by comparing the clinical target volume of participating single centres (SC-CTV) with a gold-standard CTV (GS-CTV).

Methods

The GS-CTV of three patients (P1, P2, P3) with increasing complexity was created in DICOM format from the median contour of axillary CTVs drawn by BC experts, validated using the simultaneous truth and performance-level estimation and peer-reviewed. GS-CTVs were compared with the correspondent SC-CTVs drawn by radiation oncologists, using validated metrics and a total score (TS) integrating all of them.

Results

Eighteen RT centres participated in the study. Comparative analyses revealed that, on average, the SC-CTVs were smaller than GS-CTV for P1 and P2 (by -29.25% and -27.83%, respectively) and larger for P3 (by +12.53%). The mean Jaccard index was greater for P1 and P2 compared to P3, but the overlap extent value was around 0.50 or less. Regarding nodal levels, L4 showed the highest concordance with the GS. In the intra-patient comparison, L2 and L3 achieved lower TS than L4. Nodal levels showed discrepancy with GS, which was not statistically significant for P1, and negligible for P2, while P3 had the worst agreement. DICE similarity coefficient did not exceed the minimum threshold for agreement of 0.70 in all the measurements.

Conclusions

Substantial differences were observed between SC- and GS-CTV, especially for P3 with altered arm setup. L2 and L3 were the most critical levels. The study highlighted these key points to address.

Advances in knowledge

The present study compares, by means of validated geometric indexes, manual segmentations of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer from different observers and different institutions made on radiotherapy planning CT images. Assessing such variability is of paramount importance, as geometric uncertainties might lead to incorrect dosimetry and compromise oncological outcome.

SUBMITTER: Leonardi MC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8248216 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionBreast cancer surgery currently focuses on de-escalating treatment without compromising patient survival. Axillary radiotherapy (ART) now replaces axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients with limited sentinel lymph node (SLN) involvement during the primary surgery, and this has significantly reduced the incidence of lymphedema without worsening the prognosis. However, patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic treatment (NST) cannot benefit from this option despite the low incidence of residual disease in the armpit in most cases. Data regarding the use of radiotherapy instead of ALND in this population are lacking. This study will assess whether ART is non-inferior to ALND in terms of recurrence and overall survival in patients with positive SLN after NST, including whether it reduces surgery-related adverse effects.Methods and analysesThis multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial will enroll 1660 patients with breast cancer and positive SLNs following NST in approximately 50 Spanish centers over 3 years. Patients will be stratified by NST regimen and nodal involvement (isolated tumoral cells or micrometastasis versus macrometastasis) and randomly assigned 1:1 to ART without ALND (study arm) or ALND alone (control arm). Level 3 and supraclavicular radiotherapy will be added in both arms. The primary outcome is the 5-year axillary recurrence determined by clinical and radiological examination. The secondary outcomes include lymphedema or arm dysfunction, quality of life based (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 questionnaires), disease-free survival, and overall survival.DiscussionThis study aims to provide data to confirm the efficacy and safety of ART over ALND in patients with a positive SLN after NST, together with the impact on morbidity.Ethics and disseminationThe Research Ethics Committee of Bellvitge University Hospital approved this trial (Protocol Record PR148/21, version 3, 1/2/2022) and all patients must provide written informed consent. The involvement of around 50 centers across Spain will facilitate the dissemination of our results.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, identifier number NCT04889924.

Project description:Objective:Biopsy markers are often placed into biopsy-proven metastatic axillary lymph nodes to ensure later accurate node excision. Ultrasound is the preferred imaging modality in the axilla. However, sonographic identification of biopsy markers after neoadjuvant therapy can be challenging. This is due to poor conspicuity relative to surrounding parenchymal interfaces, treatment-related alteration of malignant morphology during neoadjuvant chemotherapy, or extrusion of the marker from the target. To the authors' knowledge, the literature provides no recommendations for ultrasound scanning parameters that improve the detection of biopsy markers. The purpose of this manuscript is 3-fold: (1) To determine scanning parameters that improve sonographic conspicuity of biopsy markers in a phantom and cadaver model; (2) to implement these scanning parameters in the clinical setting; and (3) to provide strategies that might increase the likelihood of successful ultrasound detection of biopsy markers in breast imaging practices. Materials and Methods:An ex vivo study was performed using a phantom designed to simulate the heterogeneity of normal mammary or axillary soft tissues. A selection of available biopsy markers was deployed into this phantom and ultrasound (GE LOGIQ E9) was performed. Scanning parameters were adjusted to optimize marker conspicuity. For the cadaver study, the biopsy markers were deployed using ultrasound guidance into axillary lymph nodes of a female cadaver. Adjustments in transducer frequency, dynamic range, cross-beam (spatial compound imaging), beam steering, speckle reduction imaging, harmonic imaging, colorization, and speed of sound were evaluated. Settings that improved marker detection were used clinically for a year. Results:Sonographic scanning settings that improved biopsy marker conspicuity included increasing transducer frequency, decreasing dynamic range, setting cross-beam to medium hybrid, turning on beam steering, and setting speckle reduction imaging in the mid-range. There was no appreciable improvement with harmonic imaging, colorization, or speed of sound. Conclusion:On a currently available clinical ultrasound scanning system, ultrasound scanning parameters can be adjusted to improve the conspicuity of biopsy markers. Overall, optimization requires a balance between techniques that clinically increase contrast (dynamic range, harmonic imaging, and steering) and those that minimize graininess (spatial compound imaging, speckle reduction imaging, and steering). Additional scanning and procedural strategies have been provided to improve the confidence of sonographic detection of biopsy markers closely associated with the intended target.