Is individual perfusion dose-response different than ventilation dose-response for lung cancer patients treated with radiotherapy?


Journal

The British journal of radiology
ISSN: 1748-880X
Titre abrégé: Br J Radiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0373125

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 Jan 2023
Historique:
pmc-release: 01 02 2024
entrez: 12 1 2023
pubmed: 13 1 2023
medline: 13 1 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Current ventilation and perfusion dose-response studies focus on single-modalities (ventilation or perfusion) and perform pulmonary-toxicity assessment related to radiotherapy on a population-based basis. This study aims at quantitative and clinical evaluation of intrapatient differences between ventilation and perfusion dose-responses among lung cancer patients treated with radiotherapy. 20 patients enrolled on a prospective functional avoidance protocol underwent single photon emission computed tomography-CT ventilation and perfusion scans pre- and post-radiotherapy. Relative changes in pre- to post-treatment ventilation and perfusion in lung regions receiving ≥20 Gy were calculated. In addition, the slopes of the linear fit to the relative ventilation and perfusion changes in regions receiving 0-60 Gy were calculated. A radiologist read and assigned a functional defect score to pre- and post-treatment ventilation/perfusion scans. 25% of patients had a difference >35% between ventilation and perfusion pre- to post-treatment changes and 20-30% of patients had opposite directions for ventilation and perfusion pre- to post-treatment changes. Using a semi-quantitative scale, radiologist assessment showed that 20% of patients had different pre- to post-treatment ventilation changes when compared to pre- to post-treatment perfusion changes. Our data showed that ventilation dose-response can differ from perfusion dose-response for 20-30% of patients. Therefore, when performing thoracic dose-response in cancer patients, it is insufficient to look at ventilation or perfusion alone; but rather both modes of functional imaging may be needed when predicting for clinical outcomes. The significance of this study can be highlighted by the differences between the intrapatient dose-response assessments of this analysis compared to existing population-based dose-response analyses. Elucidating intrapatient ventilation and perfusion dose-response differences may be valuable in predicting pulmonary toxicity in lung cancer patients post-radiotherapy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36633096
doi: 10.1259/bjr.20220119
pmc: PMC9975372
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

20220119

Subventions

Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : UG3 CA247605
Pays : United States

Références

Radiother Oncol. 2021 Jul;160:120-124
pubmed: 33964328
Acta Oncol. 2012 Nov;51(8):975-83
pubmed: 22950387
Radiother Oncol. 1998 Dec;49(3):233-43
pubmed: 10075256
Med Phys. 2010 Mar;37(3):1261-72
pubmed: 20384264
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 Nov 1;60(3):748-58
pubmed: 15465191
Nature. 1994 Jul 21;370(6486):199-201
pubmed: 8028666
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Jul 1;92(3):683-90
pubmed: 25936813
J Thorac Oncol. 2011 Jan;6(1):71-8
pubmed: 21119546
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Jul 1;74(3):781-9
pubmed: 19084355
Med Phys. 2018 Oct;45(10):4483-4492
pubmed: 30047588
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Jan 1;52(1):58-67
pubmed: 11777622
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 Jun 1;86(2):366-71
pubmed: 23474113
Vet J. 2000 Jul;160(1):25-32
pubmed: 10950132
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Mar 15;82(4):e631-8
pubmed: 22197235
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Jun 1;47(3):681-90
pubmed: 10837952
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Oct 1;93(2):408-17
pubmed: 26275510
Phys Med Biol. 2006 Feb 21;51(4):777-91
pubmed: 16467578
Nucl Med Commun. 2002 Nov;23(11):1107-13
pubmed: 12411840
Semin Nucl Med. 2010 Nov;40(6):467-73
pubmed: 20920636
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004 Oct;20(4):540-54
pubmed: 15390146
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993 Jul 15;26(4):659-68
pubmed: 8330998
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Jul 15;47(5):1201-8
pubmed: 10889373
Acta Oncol. 2015;54(9):1350-4
pubmed: 26203930
Med Phys. 2012 Jan;39(1):289-98
pubmed: 22225299
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015 Jul;42(8):1315-24
pubmed: 25862455
Radiother Oncol. 2012 Jul;104(1):52-7
pubmed: 22578806
Radiographics. 2012 Sep-Oct;32(5):1329-41
pubmed: 22977021
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2007 Jan;102(1):468-76
pubmed: 16990505
Radiother Oncol. 1993 Nov;29(2):110-6
pubmed: 8310136
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020 Apr 1;106(5):1063-1070
pubmed: 31983558
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2014 Apr;58(2):214-22
pubmed: 24373453

Auteurs

Farnoush Forghani (F)

Formerly at Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, MO.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Loius, Missouri, United States.

Richard Castillo (R)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.

Edward Castillo (E)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan, United States.

Bernard Jones PhD (BJ)

Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO.

Chad Rusthoven (C)

Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO.

Jennifer Kwak (J)

Department of Radiology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO.

Vitali Moiseenko (V)

Department of Radiation Medicine and Applies Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA.

Inga Grills (I)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan, United States.

Moyed Miften (M)

Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO.

Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy (Y)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA.

Thomas Guerrero (T)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan, United States.

Classifications MeSH