The Impact of Different Simulation Modalities on Target Volume Delineation in Breast-Conserving Radiotherapy

Figures & data

Figure 1 Magnetic resonance simulation body positioning system of immobilized patients. a, styrofoam; b, wedge plate; c, radiofrequency coils; d, adjustable bridges.

Table 1 Mean Volumes (cm³) of the Tumor Bed Between CT and MR

	CT		MR		Inter Modality P
	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
Observer 1	14.5	8.5	11.3	7.5	0.001
Observer 2	16.5	10.6	12.0	8.2	<0.001
Observer 3	14.8	10.4	11.7	7.9	0.011
Inter observer P	0.589		0.834

Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; MR, magnetic resonance; SD, standard deviation.

Figure 2 CT (i) and MR (ii) based delineations by three observers in four examples (A–D patients) with different cavity visualization scores.

Figure 3 (A) Generalized conformity index (CIgen) and (B) the distance between the centers of mass (dCOM) as a function of cavity visualization score (CVS) for CT and MR based delineations of tumor bed. Patients’ numbers are indicated for the two modalities, respectively.