PURPOSE: To quantify the relationship between the local radiation dose received and the posttreatment positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) [(18)F]2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in the lung. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The data from 36 patients treated for esophageal cancer with thoracic radiotherapy who underwent restaging PET/CT imaging between 4 and 12 weeks after radiotherapy completion were evaluated. Their treatment planning CT was registered with the restaging PET/CT. Using histogram analysis, the voxel average FDG-PET uptake vs. radiation dose was obtained for each case. Hierarchical linear regression models for each patient were applied to study the variation in the linear trends between cases. Deviation of the dose-response curve from a linear model was tested. RESULTS: The median time between radiotherapy completion and FDG-PET imaging was 40 days (range, 26-70 days). The median of the mean standard uptake value in the lung that received 0-5 Gy was 0.63 (range, 0.36-1.27), 5-10 Gy was 0.77 (range, 0.40-1.35), 10-20 Gy was 0.80 (range, 0.40-1.72), and >20 Gy was 1.08 (range, 0.44-2.63). A hierarchical linear regression model of the radiation dose and normalized FDG uptake per case found an adequate fit with the linear model, and the addition of quadratic and logarithmic functions did not improve the fit. The 36 cases had a posterior mean of slopes range of 0.0048-0.069. CONCLUSION: The regional dose vs. radiation pneumonitis response was evaluated with FDG-PET/CT imaging. Statistical modeling found a linear relationship. The slope of this relationship varied over an order of magnitude, reflecting the range of the underlying biological response to radiation among the study population.
PURPOSE: To quantify the relationship between the local radiation dose received and the posttreatment positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) [(18)F]2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in the lung. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The data from 36 patients treated for esophageal cancer with thoracic radiotherapy who underwent restaging PET/CT imaging between 4 and 12 weeks after radiotherapy completion were evaluated. Their treatment planning CT was registered with the restaging PET/CT. Using histogram analysis, the voxel average FDG-PET uptake vs. radiation dose was obtained for each case. Hierarchical linear regression models for each patient were applied to study the variation in the linear trends between cases. Deviation of the dose-response curve from a linear model was tested. RESULTS: The median time between radiotherapy completion and FDG-PET imaging was 40 days (range, 26-70 days). The median of the mean standard uptake value in the lung that received 0-5 Gy was 0.63 (range, 0.36-1.27), 5-10 Gy was 0.77 (range, 0.40-1.35), 10-20 Gy was 0.80 (range, 0.40-1.72), and >20 Gy was 1.08 (range, 0.44-2.63). A hierarchical linear regression model of the radiation dose and normalized FDG uptake per case found an adequate fit with the linear model, and the addition of quadratic and logarithmic functions did not improve the fit. The 36 cases had a posterior mean of slopes range of 0.0048-0.069. CONCLUSION: The regional dose vs. radiation pneumonitis response was evaluated with FDG-PET/CT imaging. Statistical modeling found a linear relationship. The slope of this relationship varied over an order of magnitude, reflecting the range of the underlying biological response to radiation among the study population.
Authors: Andre Konski; Tianyu Li; Michael Christensen; Jonathan D Cheng; Jian Q Yu; Kevin Crawford; Oleh Haluszka; Jeffrey Tokar; Walter Scott; Neal J Meropol; Steven J Cohen; Alan Maurer; Gary M Freedman Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2012-06-07 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Robert Jeraj; Yue Cao; Randall K Ten Haken; Carol Hahn; Lawrence Marks Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy; Quentin Diot; Bernard Jones; Richard Castillo; Edward Castillo; Jennifer Kwak; Daniel Bowles; Inga Grills; Nicholas Myziuk; Thomas Guerrero; Craig Stevens; Tracey Schefter; Laurie E Gaspar; Brian Kavanagh; Moyed Miften; Chad Rusthoven Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2020-01-23 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Mike E Robbins; Judy K Brunso-Bechtold; Ann M Peiffer; Christina I Tsien; Janet E Bailey; Lawrence B Marks Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2012-02-21 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Thomas Guerrero; Josue Martinez; Matthew R McCurdy; Michael Wolski; Mary Francis McAleer Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-03-04 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Michael MacManus; Sarah Everitt; Tanja Schimek-Jasch; X Allen Li; Ursula Nestle; Feng-Ming Spring Kong Journal: Transl Lung Cancer Res Date: 2017-12
Authors: Ken Dornfeld; Shane Hopkins; Joel Simmons; Douglas R Spitz; Yusuf Menda; Michael Graham; Russell Smith; Gerry Funk; Lucy Karnell; Michael Karnell; Maude Dornfeld; Min Yao; John Buatti Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-12-31 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Justin P Hart; Matthew R McCurdy; Muthuveni Ezhil; Wei Wei; Meena Khan; Dershan Luo; Reginald F Munden; Valen E Johnson; Thomas M Guerrero Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-05-19 Impact factor: 7.038