Literature DB >> 12095546

Analysis of radiation-induced liver disease using the Lyman NTCP model.

Laura A Dawson1, Daniel Normolle, James M Balter, Cornelius J McGinn, Theodore S Lawrence, Randall K Ten Haken.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To describe the dose-volume tolerance for radiation-induced liver disease (RILD) using the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 203 patients treated with conformal liver radiotherapy and concurrent hepatic arterial chemotherapy were prospectively followed for RILD. Normal liver dose-volume histograms and RILD status for these patients were used as input data for determination of LKB model parameters. A complication was defined as Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Grade 3 or higher RILD < o r =4 months after completion of radiotherapy. A maximal likelihood analysis yielded best estimates for the LKB NTCP model parameters for the liver for the entire patient population. A multivariate analysis of the potential factors associated with RILD was also completed, and refined LKB model parameters were obtained for patient subgroups with different risks of RILD.
RESULTS: Of 203 patients treated with focal liver irradiation, 19 developed RILD. The LKB NTCP model fit the complication data for the entire group. The "n" parameter was larger than previously described, suggesting a strong volume effect for RILD and a correlation of NTCP with the mean liver dose. No cases of RILD were observed when the mean liver dose was <31 Gy. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that in addition to NTCP and the mean liver dose, a primary hepatobiliary cancer diagnosis (vs. liver metastases), bromodeoxyuridine hepatic artery chemotherapy (vs. fluorodeoxyuridine chemotherapy), and male gender were associated with RILD. For 169 patients treated with fluorodeoxyuridine, the refined LKB model parameters were n = 0.97, m = 0.12, tolerance dose for 50% complication risk for whole organ irradiated uniformly [TD50(1)] = 45.8 Gy for patients with liver metastases, and TD50(1) = 39.8 Gy for patients with primary hepatobiliary cancer.
CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that the liver exhibits a large volume effect for RILD, suggesting that the mean liver dose may be useful in ranking radiation plans. The inclusion of clinical factors, especially the diagnosis of primary hepatobiliary cancer vs. liver metastases, improves the estimation of NTCP over that obtained solely by the use of dose-volume data. These findings should facilitate the application of focal liver irradiation in future clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12095546     DOI: 10.1016/s0360-3016(02)02846-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  196 in total

Review 1.  Charged-particle therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Heath D Skinner; Theodore S Hong; Sunil Krishnan
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 5.934

Review 2.  Hepatic radiation toxicity: avoidance and amelioration.

Authors:  Chandan Guha; Brian D Kavanagh
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 5.934

Review 3.  Technological advances in radiotherapy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Milan Vosmik; Jiri Petera; Igor Sirak; Miroslav Hodek; Petr Paluska; Jiri Dolezal; Marcela Kopacova
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-11-28       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Evaluating inter-campus plan consistency using a knowledge based planning model.

Authors:  Sean L Berry; Rongtao Ma; Amanda Boczkowski; Andrew Jackson; Pengpeng Zhang; Margie Hunt
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2016-07-06       Impact factor: 6.280

5.  Dosimetric Analysis and Normal-Tissue Complication Probability Modeling of Child-Pugh Score and Albumin-Bilirubin Grade Increase After Hepatic Irradiation.

Authors:  Jennifer Pursley; Issam El Naqa; Nina N Sanford; Bridget Noe; Jennifer Y Wo; Christine E Eyler; Matthew Hwang; Kristy K Brock; Beow Y Yeap; John A Wolfgang; Theodore S Hong; Clemens Grassberger
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 6.  Hepatocyte Transplantation: Quo Vadis?

Authors:  Mark Barahman; Patrik Asp; Namita Roy-Chowdhury; Milan Kinkhabwala; Jayanta Roy-Chowdhury; Rafi Kabarriti; Chandan Guha
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 7.  Radiation-associated liver injury.

Authors:  Charlie C Pan; Brian D Kavanagh; Laura A Dawson; X Allen Li; Shiva K Das; Moyed Miften; Randall K Ten Haken
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Estimating functional liver reserve following hepatic irradiation: adaptive normal tissue response models.

Authors:  Matthew H Stenmark; Yue Cao; Hesheng Wang; Andrew Jackson; Edgar Ben-Josef; Randall K Ten Haken; Theodore S Lawrence; Mary Feng
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2014-05-08       Impact factor: 6.280

Review 9.  Management of hepatocellular cancer.

Authors:  Mary F Mulcahy
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2005-09

Review 10.  Radioembolization with Yttrium-90 microspheres in hepatocellular carcinoma: Role and perspectives.

Authors:  Cristina Mosconi; Alberta Cappelli; Cinzia Pettinato; Rita Golfieri
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2015-04-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.