Abstract
Aim
With superior soft tissue imaging characteristics, MRI is better than CT in determining the local disease extent during intracavitary brachytherapy of carcinoma cervix. The aim of the study is to evaluate the differences in dimensions and volumes of the target and organs at risk and the subsequent changes in dosimetry between MRI- and CT-based plans.
Methods and Materials
MRI and CT datasets of 34 locally advanced cervical cancer patients taken up for intracavitary brachytherapy between January and September 2017 were analyzed. The target volumes and organs at risk, namely bladder, rectum and sigmoid, were contoured by the same radiation oncologist on both the MRI and CT images as per the GEC ESTRO guidelines. The dimensions of HRCTV, the dose volume parameters of the target and OAR were recorded for the CT and MRI plans.
Results
CT image significantly overestimated the width (p = 0.000) and thickness (p = 0.009) of HRCTV. The volumes of HRCTV (p = 0.000) and IRCTV (p = 0.041) were larger with CT image compared to MRI. There was no statistically significant difference between rectal (p = 0.107) and sigmoid (p = 0.365) volumes on CT and MRI. There was statistically significant difference (all p < 0.05) between the dose received by 100%, 98%, 90% and 50% (D100, D98, D90 and D50, respectively) of HRCTV and IRCTV on CT and MRI. There was statistically significant difference (all p < 0.05) in the dose delivered to the bladder. However, there was no statistically significant difference (all p > 0.05) in the dose received by rectum and sigmoid on CT and MR plans.
Conclusion
MRI-based brachytherapy planning has shown considerable improvements in tumor control and reductions in normal tissue toxicity. However, the high cost of MRI and non-availability of MRI preclude its use in many centers. CT, on the other hand, is widely available, but it can lead to overestimation of the target, at the time of brachytherapy. Hence, it is important to identify the subset of patients who will benefit from MRI-based planning at the time of brachytherapy.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Concurrent chemoradiation is the standard of care for locally advanced cervical cancers [1,2,3,4,5]. High radiation doses are delivered to the tumor through a combination of external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Conventionally, 2D X-ray-based planning with dose prescribed to point A using tandem-based applicators was used to deliver brachytherapy [6]. With point-based 2D planning, there is poor correlation between point doses and the doses to the target volume and organs at risk.
With the recent advancements in imaging, there is increase in use of 3D image-based brachytherapy. Volume-based dose calculations are feasible with CT and MR imaging. In 2005, the Group European de Curietherapie–European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (GEC–ESTRO) developed guidelines for target volume delineation using MRI for image-guided brachytherapy [7, 8]. With superior soft tissue imaging characteristics, MRI is better than CT in determining the local disease extent [9, 10]. Several studies have shown significant improvement in tumor control rates with the addition of MRI to brachytherapy planning [11,12,13].
However, lack of availability of MRI, direct access to MRI and the high cost of MRI-compatible applicators preclude its use in several institutions. CT imaging after brachytherapy application is easier to implement with the widespread availability of CT simulators in the radiation oncology departments. Viswanathan et al [14] developed CT-based contouring guidelines to delineate target volumes and organs at risk on CT.
Very few studies have compared MRI- versus CT-based planning for intracavitary brachytherapy. In the present study, we evaluated the differences in dimensions and volumes of the target and organs at risk and the subsequent changes in dosimetry between MRI- and CT-based plans.
Materials and Methods
MRI and CT datasets of 34 locally advanced cervical cancer patients taken up for intracavitary brachytherapy between January and September 2017 were analyzed. All patients were treated with external beam radiotherapy dose of 50 Gy in 2 Gy per fraction along with weekly cisplatin 40 mg/m2. Patients were taken up for brachytherapy after completion of external beam radiotherapy. A dose of 7 Gy to point A was delivered per fraction for a total of three fractions. MRI was taken either for the first or second fraction. CT images were taken for all the three fractions. MRI and the corresponding CT datasets were analyzed in the present study.
Brachytherapy Procedure
All the brachytherapy insertions were done under general anesthesia in the operating room. Bladder was catheterized in all patients, and the bladder balloon was filled with 7 ml of nonionic contrast and saline and left to drain continuously. A CT- and MR-compatible tandem ovoid applicator with a curvature of 30º was inserted after serial dilatations into the uterine canal. The most common tandem length used was 5 cm. The most appropriate size of the ovoid was inserted into the vaginal fornices, and the applicator was secured in position. Anterior and posterior vaginal gauze packing was done.
Imaging
All patients underwent MRI scan at the radiology department followed by CT in the radiotherapy department. MRI was done with a 1.5 Tesla MRI with a pelvic surface coil [Siemens, Erlangen, Germany]; 3 mm slice thickness with no intersection gap was taken. Sagittal, coronal and para-axial images were obtained. CT images with slice thickness of 3 mm were obtained using a CT simulator [Somatom, Siemens, Erlangen, Germany]. All the acquired images were then transferred to Oncentra treatment planning system [Oncentra, an Elekta company, Stockholm, Sweden].
Contouring and Planning
The target volumes and organs at risk, namely bladder, rectum and sigmoid, were contoured by the same radiation oncologist on both the MRI and CT images as per the GEC ESTRO guidelines. Gross tumor volume (GTV) was contoured only on MRI images. High-risk clinical target volume (HRCTV—MR) and intermediate-risk clinical target volume (IRCTV—MR) and the organs at risk were contoured on T2-weighted MRI sequences as per the GEC ESTRO recommendations.
The entire cervix along with any parametrial and vaginal extensions as per the clinical examination at the time of brachytherapy was included in the high-risk clinical target volume (HRCTV—CT) on CT. The bladder wall was contoured from the dome to the urethra. The rectal wall was contoured from the level of ischial tuberosity to the rectosigmoid junction. The sigmoid was contoured from the rectosigmoid junction to the level where it crosses anteriorly.
Applicator reconstruction was done on MRI. Dummy MRI markers were used as surrogate for source position. A standard loading pattern was followed to calculate the dosimetry. The dwell positions for the tandem were 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 13, 16 and 20 and 3, 4, 5 and 6 for the ovoids. A step size of 2.5 mm was used for all applications. A dose of 7 Gy to point A was prescribed. Dwell time optimization was done in selected cases to meet the GEC ESTRO constraints for the organs at risk. Applicator reconstruction and a similar planning were done for the CT images, and a dose of 7 Gy was prescribed to point A. Dose volume histograms were generated for both MRI and CT plans.
The volumes of HRCTV, IRCTV and OARs were recorded for both the CT and MRI contours. The values of height, maximum width and thickness of HRCTV were recorded for both the MRI and CT contours. The dose received by 100%, 98%, 90% and 50% (D100, D98, D90 and D50, respectively) of HRCTV and IRCTV of the CT and MRI plans was calculated. The volumes of organs at risk and the dose received by 0.1 cc, 1 cc and 2 cc (D0.1 cc, D1 cc and D2 cc, respectively) of the organs at risk were recorded for the CT and MRI plans.
Figures 1, 2 and 3 show the axial and sagittal CT (top) and MR (bottom) images showing the dimensions of width, height and thickness of HRCTV, respectively.
Statistical Analysis
Data collected were analyzed using SPSS statistical package version 20 (IBM corporation, New York, USA). Paired two-tailed t test was used to analyze data that were normally distributed. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyze data that were not normally distributed. A p value of less than 0.05 was considered significant.
Results
Thirty-four patients were recruited between January and September 2017. The median age of patients was 50 years (range 37–70). Fifty percentage of patients had stage IIIB disease, 41% had stage IIB disease and 3% had stage IB2, IIA2 and IVA diseases, respectively. All patients received external beam radiotherapy of 50 Gy along with weekly cisplatin. Examination under anesthesia at the time of brachytherapy revealed no residual growth in 53% of patients. 35.2% of patients had central disease with residual growth involving anterior or posterior lips or both, and 11.8% of patients had residual central disease with unilateral parametrial involvement at the time of brachytherapy.
Difference in Volumes of Target and OAR
The difference in volumes of the target and the organs at risk between CT and MRI images is shown in Table 1. The volumes of HRCTV (p = 0.000) and IRCTV (p = 0.041) were larger with CT image compared to MRI, and the difference was found to be statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference between rectal (p = 0.107) and sigmoid (p = 0.365) volumes on CT and MRI images. The difference in bladder volume (p = 0.002) can be explained by the time taken between MRI and CT acquisition. In 33% of our patients, there was an average delay of 80 min between MRI and CT acquisition due to logistic reasons.
Difference in Dimensions of HRCTV
The differences in dimensions of HRCTV are tabulated in Table 2. CT images significantly overestimated the width (p = 0.000) and thickness (p = 0.009) of HRCTV which is similar to that reported by other studies in the literature. There was no significant difference in the height (p = 0.063) of HRCTV between CT and MRI images.
Difference in Dose to Target and OAR
The differences in dose to the target and OAR are tabulated in Tables 3 and 4. There was statistically significant difference (all p < 0.05) between the dose received by 100%, 98%, 90% and 50% (D100, D98, D90 and D50, respectively) of HRCTV and IRCTV on CT and MRI. There was no statistically significant difference between the dose received by 100% of HRCTV (p = 0.110) and IRCTV (p = 0.218) (V100) between CT and MR plans. There was statistically significant difference (all p < 0.05) in the dose delivered to the bladder due to the delay in CT acquisition as mentioned earlier. The distension of bladder due to the delay in CT acquisition resulted in increased D0.1 cc, D1 cc and D2 cc to the bladder on CT images, and it was found to be statistically significant. However, there was no statistically significant difference (all p >0.05) in the dose received by rectum and sigmoid on CT and MR plans.
Analysis of dose volume parameters of HRCTV on CT and MRI based on the residual disease at the time of brachytherapy:
Fifty-three percentage of patients had no residual disease at the time of brachytherapy, and 47% of patients had residual disease at the time of brachytherapy. For patients with no residual disease at the time of brachytherapy, HRCTV volume was statistically larger (p = 0.002) on CT compared to MRI. The width of HRCTV was more on CT (p = 0.000), but there was no statistically significant difference in the height and thickness of HRCTV on CT and MRI (Table 5). Dose parameters like D100 (p = 0.014) and D98 (p = 0.043) were statistically higher on MRI compared to CT.
For patients with residual disease at the time of brachytherapy, HRCTV volume was more on CT (Table 6) and was statistically significant (p = 0.000). There was no statistically significant difference in the height of HRCTV between CT and MRI, but the thickness (p = 0.031) and width (p = 0.000) of HRCTV were more on CT and it was statistically significant. There was no significant difference in the dose volume parameters except D98 (p = 0.020).
Discussion
MRI is the gold standard imaging modality for target delineation in 3D image-based brachytherapy of cervix due to better depiction of soft tissue. Detailed information regarding tumor regression after external beam radiotherapy is also well depicted on MRI. CT, on the other hand, provides limited information on post-radiation changes and parametrial disease. The distinction between the corpus and the cervix is also challenging on CT. It is difficult to define the gross tumor volume at the time of brachytherapy on CT images. However, the depiction of the applicator is better with CT compared to MRI.
Comparison between MRI- and CT-based contours of the target and the organs at risk has been reported earlier. In a study conducted at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center [15], the target and the organs at risk were contoured on MRI and CT image sets. The HRCTV volume was found to be significantly smaller on MRI compared to CT. However, there was no significant difference in the dose delivered to the HRCTV and OAR.
In a study conducted by Eskander et al [16], there was statistically significant overestimation of thickness (p = 0.004) and underestimation of height (p = 0.006) of HRCTV on CT. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the width and volume of HRCTV and D100, D90 of HRCTV between CT and MRI plans. There was a statistically significant difference in the D2 cc of bladder with MRI and CT values of 87.5 Gy and 91 Gy, respectively (p = 0.041). This difference was attributed to the ability to better identify the bladder wall on MRI compared to CT.
Ling Yip et al [17] found an overestimation of volume (p = 0.001), width (p = 0.004) and thickness (p = 0.001) of HRCTV on CT-based plans compared to MRI plans. There was no statistically significant difference between the height (p = 0.372) of HRCTV on CT and MRI images. In a similar study conducted on 17 patients [18], there was an underestimated height (p = 0.001) and overestimated width (p = 0.009) at the level of parametrium on CT images. However, there was no difference in the dose delivered to the target and organs at risk. The present study showed a statistically significant overestimation of width and thickness on CT (Table 7).
Spatial agreement between CT along with pre-brachytherapy MRI and MRI-based HRCTV delineation was analyzed by Federico et al [19]. They found geographical miss of CT-based contouring to be more pronounced for stage IVA cancers in the areas of gross tumor involvement. In a systematic review of 13 clinical studies involving 465 patients [20], width was overestimated and height underestimated on CT. Thickness was comparable between the two imaging modalities. The dose parameters for HRCTV were found to be lower on CT compared to MRI. The dose parameters for HRCTV in the present study were also found to be statistically lower on CT compared to MRI.
Swanick et al [21] recommend MRI-based brachytherapy for patients with higher body mass index and for patients with tumors more than 5 cm with parametrial invasion on MRI at diagnosis. Viswanathan et al [22] found that the CTV contours were identical on CT and MRI for patients with no parametrial extension. They recommend MRI for patients with parametrial invasion at diagnosis with a complete response to teletherapy. The present study shows a statistically significant overestimation of volume, width and thickness of HRCTV on CT compared to MRI for patients with residual disease at the time of brachytherapy. The dose parameters like D100, D98, D90 and D50 were higher with MRI plans, but none were statistically significant except D98.
Though there is statistically significant difference in the volume and dimensions of HRCTV between the CT and MRI images in the present study, there was no statistically significant difference in the dose parameters of the HRCTV(except D98) in both the subset of patients with residual disease and no residual disease at the time of brachytherapy. Hence, CT-based planning is adequate for patients in resource-poor setting. However, it is important to identify the subset of patients who would specifically benefit from a MRI at the time of brachytherapy in a larger study with more number of patients.
Conclusion
MRI-based brachytherapy planning has shown considerable improvements in tumor control and reductions in normal tissue toxicity. However, the high cost of MRI and non-availability of MRI preclude its use in many centers. CT, on the other hand, is widely available, but it can lead to overestimation of the target, at the time of brachytherapy. The present study did not show any statistically significant difference between CT and MRI plans in the dose parameters of the target.
References
Eifel PJ, Winter K, Morris M, Levenback C, Grigsby PW, Cooper J, et al. Pelvic irradiation with concurrent chemotherapy versus pelvic and para-aortic irradiation for high-risk cervical cancer: an update of radiation therapy oncology group trial (RTOG) 90–01. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(5):872–80.
Morris M, Eifel PJ, Lu J, Grigsby PW, Levenback C, Stevens RE, et al. Pelvic radiation with concurrent chemotherapy compared with pelvic and para-aortic radiation for high-risk cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999;340(15):1137–43.
Rose PG, Ali S, Watkins E, Thigpen JT, Deppe G, Clarke-Pearson DL, et al. Long-term follow-up of a randomized trial comparing concurrent single agent cisplatin, cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy, or hydroxyurea during pelvic irradiation for locally advanced cervical cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(19):2804–10.
Stehman FB, Ali S, Keys HM, Muderspach LI, Chafe WE, Gallup DG, et al. Radiation therapy with or without weekly cisplatin for bulky stage 1B cervical carcinoma: follow-up of a Gynecologic Oncology Group trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(5):503e1–6.
Lanciano R, Calkins A, Bundy BN, Parham G, Lucci JA 3rd, Moore DH, et al. Randomized comparison of weekly cisplatin or protracted venous infusion of fluorouracil in combination with pelvic radiation in advanced cervix cancer: a gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(33):8289–95.
International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Dose and volume specification for reporting intracavitary therapy in gynecology. Vol 38. Bethesda, MD: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements; 1985.
Haie-Meder C, Potter R, Van Limbergen E, et al. Recommendations from gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO Working Group (I): concepts and terms in 3D image based 3D treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy with emphasis on MRI assessment of GTVand CTV. Radiother Oncol. 2005;74:235–45.
Potter R, Haie-Meder C, Van Limbergen E, et al. Recommendations from gynaecological (GYN) GEC ESTRO working group (II): concepts and terms in 3D image-based treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy-3D dose volume parameters and aspects of 3D image-based anatomy, radiation physics, radiobiology. Radiother Oncol. 2006;78:67–77.
Hricak H, Gatsonis C, Coakley FV, Snyder B, Reinhold C, Schwartz LH, et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: CT and MR imaging in preoperative evaluation: ACRIN/GOG comparative study of diagnostic performance and interobserver variability. Radiology. 2007;245(2):491–8.
Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Coakley F, Reinhold C, Thomas G, Amendola M, et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: tumor delineation by magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and clinical examination, verified by pathologic results, in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 Intergroup Study. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(36):5687–94.
Potter R, Georg P, Dimopoulos JC, Grimm M, Berger D, Nesvacil N, et al. Clinical outcome of protocol based image (MRI) guided adaptive brachytherapy combined with 3D conformal radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2011;100(1):116–23.
Lindegaard JC, Fokdal LU, Nielsen SK, Juul-Christensen J, Tanderup K. MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer from a Nordic perspective. Acta Oncol. 2013;52(7):1510–9.
Rijkmans EC, Nout RA, Rutten IH, Ketelaars M, Neelis KJ, Laman MS, et al. Improved survival of patients with cervical cancer treated with image-guided brachytherapy compared with conventional brachytherapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;135(2):231–8.
Viswanathan AN, Dimopoulos J, Kirisits C, Berger D, Potter R. Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging-based contouring in cervical cancer brachytherapy: results of a prospective trial and preliminary guidelines for standardized contours. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68:491–8.
Hrycushko B, Pinho DF, Pedrosa I, Medin P, Albuquerque K. MRI versus CT contouring of the high-risk CTV for HDR intracavitary brachytherapy of cervical cancer patients: Love’s labor lost in the dose? Abstr. Brachytherapy. 2014;13:S88.
Eskander RN, Scanderbeg D, Saenz CC, Brown M, Yashar C. Comparison of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in cervical cancer brachytherapy target and normal tissue contouring. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20:47–53.
Yip WWL, Wong JSY, Lee VWY, Wong FCS, Tung SY. Throwing the dart blind-folded: comparison of computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer with regard to dose received by the ‘actual’ targets and organs at risk. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2017;9(5):446–52.
Krishantry R, Patel FD, Singh P, et al. CT or MRI for Image-based brachytherapy in cervical cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2012;42:309–13.
Fedrico M, Fotina I, Hegazy N, et al. Analysis of spatial agreement between CT-(+ pre-BT MRI) and MRI-based HRCTV delineation in cevix cancer brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2011;99:S57.
Wang F, Tang Q, Lv G, Zhao F, Jiang X, Zhu X, Li X, Yan S. Comparison of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in cervical cancer brachytherapy: a systematic review. Brachytherapy. 2017;16(2):1.
Swanick CW, Castle KO, Vedam S, Munsell MF, Turner LM, Rauch GM, Jhingran A, Eifel PJ, Klopp AH. Comparison of computed tomography- and magnetic resonance imaging-based clinical target volume contours at brachytherapy for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96(4):793–800.
Viswanathan AN, Erickson B, Gaffney DK, et al. Comparison and consensus guidelines for delineation of clinical target volume for CT- and MR-based brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;90(2):320–8.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ramya, R., Saravanan, S., Vijayalakshmi, J. et al. Differences Between MRI- and CT-Based Delineation of Target Volume and Organs at Risk in High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy of Cervix. Indian J Gynecol Oncolog 17, 62 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40944-019-0310-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40944-019-0310-5