Pet Edge Detection Generates Superior Target Volumes Compared With Iso-Thresholding In Mice Implanted With Emt6 Tumors

J. Wen,D.J. Ma,J. Hoefert,W. Lu,P.J. Parikh
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.07.191
2010-01-01
Abstract:The purpose of this study was to compare gross tumor volumes (GTV) as measured by PET edge detection and iso-thresholding techniques to 3D pathologic tumor volumes using a mouse model. Nine mice were implanted with EMT6 tumors implanted in the nape or the thigh of the animal. These animals were immobilized and anesthetized, then underwent micro FDG-PET/CT imaging (0.72 mm resolution) prior to removal of the tumors. Excised tumors were embedded in OCT-Tissue freezing medium. Each specimen was then frozen and sliced into 40 μm slices using a cryomicrotome. The specimen was photographed every five slices (200 μm). The tumor boundary was manually contoured in every optical image and reconstructed to determine a 3D pathologic tumor volume. Multiple PET volumes were determined by utilizing either edge detection or iso-thresholding at levels from 20% to 50% of the maximum voxel intensity in the tumor using MIMVISTA version 4.2.2. The different PET volumes were subsequently compared to the 3D pathologic tumor volume to determine correspondence. The mean GTV as measured by 3D pathology was 147 ± 69 mm3. For the 20, 30, 40, and 50% iso-intensity volumes, the mean tumor size was 365 ± 101, 239 ± 69, 169 ± 74, and 107 ± 62 mm3, respectively. For edge detection, the mean tumor size was 152 ± 65 mm3. No fixed threshold level in PET gave optimal results for all tumors. The mean percent error compared to the pathologic tumor for the 20-50% iso-intensity volumes were 214% (p = 0.0003), 105% (p = 0.01), 35% (p = 0.36), and -13% (p = 0.13), respectively. The correlation coefficients for the 20-50% volumes were 0.01, 0.13, 0.52, and 0.38, respectively. The mean percent error compared to the pathologic volume for the edge detection algorithm was 8.7% (p = 0.57) with a correlation coefficient of 0.92. For EMT6 tumors, PET edge detection provided target volumes that were in much closer correspondence to the pathologic tumor volume when compared to iso-thresholding techniques.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?