Predicting Per-Lesion Local Recurrence in Locally Advanced Lung Cancer using Metabolic Tumor Volume on Pre- and Mid-Radiation FDG-PET

Author(s):  
M.S. Binkley ◽  
J.L. Koenig ◽  
Q. Sodji ◽  
P.G. Maxim ◽  
M. Diehn ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 93 (1105) ◽  
pp. 20190743 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarit Appel ◽  
Jair Bar ◽  
Dror Alezra ◽  
Maoz Ben-Ayun ◽  
Tatiana Rabin-Alezra ◽  
...  

Objectives: Anatomic changes may occur during chemoradiation treatment for lung cancers, requiring adaptive replanning. Here we characterize these cases. Methods: We retrospectively studied lung cancer cases that underwent resimulation and adaptive replanning during 1/2016–3/2019. We compared first and second CT-simulation regarding tumor location, timing of change, tumor volume, anatomical alteration and change in simulation technique. We also compared dosimetric parameters between the plans, recorded local control, and overall survival outcomes. Results: Out of 281 patients, 58 underwent replanning (20.6%). Histology included small cell (22.4%) and non-small cell (77.6%). Stage III was in 91.4%. Mean radiation dose of 59.4 Gray (Gy) (range 50-66Gy). Tumor location was peribronchial in 53.5%. Timing of replanning was in the first, second and final third of the treatment course in 26%, 43% and 31% respectively. Changes in gross tumor volume were observed in 74%; mean gross tumor volume was 276.7cc vs 192.7 cc (first vs second simulation, p = 0.001). Anatomical changes were identified in 35.4% including pleural fluid accumulation, atelectasis or pneumothorax alteration. Change in simulation technique was performed in 25.9%, including breath-hold or continuous positive airway pressure. Changes in dosimetric parameters when the same technique was used: lung V20Gy 26% (standard deviation, SD 7.6) vs 25.3% (SD 6.6) (p = 0.36), mean lung dose 15.1 Gy (SD 3.7) vs 14.7Gy (SD 3.3) (p = 0.23), heart V40Gy 10.2% (SD13) vs 7.2% (SD 9.8) (p = 0.037). When simulation technique changed: lung V20Gy 30.8% (SD 8.2) vs 27.3% (SD 8) (p = 0.012), mean lung dose 17.3 Gy (SD 4.4) vs 15.3 Gy (SD 3.8) (p = 0.007), heart V40Gy 11.1% (SD 14.7) vs 6.5% (SD 6.7) (p = 0.014). 2 year local control was 60.7% (95% confidence interval, 34.5–79.2%), and median overall survival was 19.7 months. Conclusion: Adaptive replanning of radiation was performed in a fifth of locally advanced lung cancer patients. In most cases tumor volume decreased, or atelectasis resolved, causing mediastinal shifts, which, if unidentified and left uncorrected, may have led to local failure and increased toxicity. The heart V40Gy was reduced significantly in all cases, but significant reduction in lung doses was evident only if simulation technique was altered. Advances in knowledge: In locally advanced lung cancer image-guidance with cone beam CT can detect significant mediastinal shifts and gross tumor volume changes that raise the need for adaptive replanning. Image guidance-triggered adaptive replanning should be added to the armament of advanced radiation treatment planning in locally advanced lung cancer.


2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 224-230
Author(s):  
Scott R. Silva ◽  
Murat Surucu ◽  
Jennifer Steber ◽  
Matthew M. Harkenrider ◽  
Mehee Choi

Objective: Radiation treatment planning for locally advanced lung cancer can be technically challenging, as delivery of ≥60 Gy to large volumes with concurrent chemotherapy is often associated with significant risk of normal tissue toxicity. We clinically implemented a novel hybrid RapidArc technique in patients with lung cancer and compared these plans with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and RapidArc-only plans. Materials/Methods: Hybrid RapidArc was used to treat 11 patients with locally advanced lung cancer having bulky mediastinal adenopathy. All 11 patients received concurrent chemotherapy. All underwent a 4-dimensional computed tomography planning scan. Hybrid RapidArc plans concurrently combined static (60%) and RapidArc (40%) beams. All cases were replanned using 3- to 5-field 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and RapidArc technique as controls. Results: Significant reductions in dose were observed in hybrid RapidArc plans compared to 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy plans for total lung V20 and mean (−2% and −0.6 Gy); contralateral lung mean (−2.92 Gy); and esophagus V60 and mean (−16.0% and −2.2 Gy; all P < .05). Contralateral lung doses were significantly lower for hybrid RapidArc plans compared to RapidArc-only plans (all P < .05). Compared to 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, heart V60 and mean dose were significantly improved with hybrid RapidArc (3% vs 5%, P = .04 and 16.32 Gy vs 16.65 Gy, P = .03). However, heart V40 and V45 and maximum spinal cord dose were significantly lower with RapidArc plans compared to hybrid RapidArc plans. Conformity and homogeneity were significantly better with hybrid RapidArc plans compared to 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy plans ( P < .05). Treatment was well tolerated, with no grade 3+ toxicities. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first report on the clinical application of hybrid RapidArc in patients with locally advanced lung cancer. Hybrid RapidArc permitted safe delivery of 60 to 66 Gy to large lung tumors with concurrent chemotherapy and demonstrated advantages for reduction in low-dose lung volumes, esophageal dose, and mean heart dose.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document