Comparing Breast Conservation Surgery Seromas Contoured by Radiation Therapists versus those Contoured by a Radiation Oncologist in Radiation Therapy Planning for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Breast Neoplasms
/ pathology
Clinical Competence
Female
Humans
Mastectomy, Segmental
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Staging
Postoperative Complications
/ diagnostic imaging
Radiation Oncologists
Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted
/ methods
Seroma
/ diagnostic imaging
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
Interdisciplinary
target delineation
tumour bed
Journal
Journal of medical imaging and radiation sciences
ISSN: 1876-7982
Titre abrégé: J Med Imaging Radiat Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101469694
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2020
03 2020
Historique:
received:
04
03
2019
revised:
28
10
2019
accepted:
28
10
2019
pubmed:
28
1
2020
medline:
11
5
2021
entrez:
28
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In the management of early-stage breast cancer using radiation therapy, computed tomography (CT) simulation is used to identify the breast conservation surgery (BCS) seroma as a proxy for the tumour bed. The delineation or contouring of the seroma is generally a task performed by a radiation oncologist (RO). With increasing patient numbers and other demands placed on ROs, the scope of practice for radiation therapists (RTs) is continually expanding, and the need for skills transfer from one profession to another has been investigated in recent years. This study aims to compare the BCS seroma volumes contoured by RTs with those contoured by ROs to add evidence in support of expanding the RTs' role in the treatment planning process in the management of early-stage breast cancer. A study was undertaken using the CT-simulation (CT-sim) data sets of patients with early-stage breast cancer treated in 2013. The CT-sim data sets had BCS seromas contoured by 1 of 5 ROs as part of routine clinical management. This study involved 4 RTs who each used the patient information to identify and contour breast seromas on 50 deidentified CT-sim data sets. Metrics used to compare RT versus RO contours included volume size, overlap between volumes, and geographical distance from the centre of volumes. There were 50 CT-sim data sets with 1 RO contour and 4 RT contours analysed. The contour volumes of the 4 RTs and the ROs were assessed. Although there were 50 CT-sim data sets presented to each RT, analysis was carried out on 45, 43, 46, and 45 CT-sim data sets. There were no comparisons made where contours were not delineated. The contour volumes of the 4 RTs and the ROs were assessed with an interclass correlation coefficient, with a result of excellent reliability (0.975, 95% [0.963, 0.985]). The DICE similarity coefficient was used to compare the overlap of each RT contour with the RO contour; the results were favourable with mean (95% CI) DSCs 0.685, 0.640, 0.678, and 0.681, respectively. Comparing the RT and RO geographical centre of the seroma volumes, good to excellent reliability between the RTs and ROs was demonstrated (95% CI mean RO vs RT distances (mm): 3.75, 4.99, 7.71, and 3.39). There was no statistically significant difference between the distances (P = 0.65). BCS seromas contoured by RTs compared well with those contoured by an RO. This research has provided further evidence to support RTs in assuming additional contouring responsibilities in radiation therapy planning for patients with early-stage breast cancer.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31983574
pii: S1939-8654(19)30550-8
doi: 10.1016/j.jmir.2019.10.007
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
108-116Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.