The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise and summarise evidence surrounding the clinical use of fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for target volume delineation (TVD) in rectal cancer radiotherapy planning.

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, CINAHL, Web of Science and Scopus databases and other sources were systematically queried using keywords and relevant synonyms. Eligible full-text studies were assessed for methodological quality using the QUADAS-2 tool.

Eight of the 1448 studies identified met the inclusion criteria. Findings showed that MRI significantly delineate larger tumour volumes (TVs) than FDG-PET/CT while diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) defined smaller gross tumour volumes (GTVs) compared to T2 weighted-Magnetic Resonance Image. CT-based GTVs were found to be larger compared to FDG-PET/CT. FDG-PET/CT also identified new lesions in 15–17% patients and TVs extending outside the routinely used clinical standard CT TV in 29–83% patients. Between observers, delineated volumes were similar and consistent between MRI sequences, whereas interobserver agreement was significantly improved with FDG-PET/CT than CT.

FDG-PET/CT and DW-MRI appear to delineate smaller rectal TVs and show improved interobserver variability. Overall, this study provides valuable insights into the amount of attention in the research literature that has been paid to imaging for TVD in rectal cancer.

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether RapidPlan (RP) could generate clinically acceptable prostate volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans.

The in-house RP model was used to generate VMAT plans for 50 previously treated prostate cancer patients, with no additional optimisation being performed. The VMAT plans that were generated using the RP model were compared with the patients’ previous, manually optimised clinical plans (MP), none of which had been used for the development of the in-house RP prostate model. Differences between RP and MP in planning target volume (PTV) doses, organs at risk (OAR) sparing, monitor units (MU) and planning time required to produce treatment plans were analysed. Assessment of PTV doses was based on the conformation number (CN), homogeneity index (HI), D2%, D99% and the mean dose of the PTV. The OAR doses evaluated were the rectal V50 Gy, V65 Gy, V70 Gy and the mean dose, the bladder V65 Gy, V70 Gy and the mean dose, and the mean dose to both femurs.

D99% and mean dose of the PTV were lower for RP than for MP (p = 0·006 and p = 0·040, respectively).V50 Gy, V65 Gy and the mean dose to rectum were lower in RP than in MP (p < 0·001). V65 Gy, V70 Gy and the mean dose to bladder were lower in RP than in MP (p < 0·001). RP had enhanced the sparing of both femurs (p < 0·001) and significantly reduced the planning time to less than 5% of the time taken with MP. MU in RP was significantly higher than MP by an average of 52·5 MU (p < 0·001) and 46 out of the 50 RP plans were approved by the radiation oncologist.

This study has demonstrated that VMAT plans generated using an in-house RP prostate model in a single optimisation for prostate patients were clinically acceptable with comparable or better plan quality compared to MP. RP can add value and improve treatment planning efficiency in a high-throughput radiotherapy department through reduced plan optimisation time while maintaining consistency in the plan quality.

The aim of this study is to establish clinical evidence regarding the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in target volume definition for radiotherapy treatment planning of brain tumours.

Primary studies were systematically retrieved from six electronic databases and other sources. Studies included were only those that quantitatively compared computed tomography (CT) and MRI in target volume definition for radiotherapy of brain tumours. Study characteristics and quality were assessed and the data were extracted from eligible studies. Effect estimates for each study was computed as mean percentage difference based on individual patient data where available. The included studies were then combined in meta-analysis using Review Manager (RevMan) software version 5.0.

Five studies with a total number of 72 patients were included in this review. The quality of the studies was rated strong. The percentages mean differences of the studies were 7·47, 11·36, 30·70, 41·69 and −24·6% using CT as the baseline. The result of statistical analysis showed small-to-moderate heterogeneity; τ2=36·8; χ2=6·23; df=4 (p=0·18); I2=36%. The overall effect estimate was −1·85 [95% confidence interval (CI); −7·24, 10·94], Z=0·40 (p=0·069>0·5).

Brain tumour volumes measured using MRI-based method for radiotherapy treatment planning were larger compared with CT defined volumes but the difference lacks statistical significance.