PURPOSE: Extensive research has led to the identification of numerous dosimetric parameters as well as patient characteristics, associated with lung toxicity, but their clinical usefulness remains largely unknown. We investigated the predictive value of patient characteristics in combination with established dosimetric parameters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 438 lung cancer patients treated with (chemo)radiation were used. Lung toxicity was scored using the Common Toxicity Criteria version 3.0. A multivariate model as well as two single parameter models, including either V(20) or MLD, was built. Performance of the models was expressed as the AUC (Area Under the Curve). RESULTS: The mean MLD was 13.5 Gy (SD 4.5 Gy), while the mean V(20) was 21.0% (SD 7.3%). Univariate models with V(20) or MLD both yielded an AUC of 0.47. The final multivariate model, which included WHO-performance status, smoking status, forced expiratory volume (FEV(1)), age and MLD, yielded an AUC of 0.62 (95% CI: 0.55-0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Within the range of radiation doses used in our clinic, dosimetric parameters play a less important role than patient characteristics for the prediction of lung toxicity. Future research should focus more on patient-related factors, as opposed to dosimetric parameters, in order to identify patients at high risk for developing radiation-induced lung toxicity more accurately.
PURPOSE: Extensive research has led to the identification of numerous dosimetric parameters as well as patient characteristics, associated with lung toxicity, but their clinical usefulness remains largely unknown. We investigated the predictive value of patient characteristics in combination with established dosimetric parameters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 438 lung cancerpatients treated with (chemo)radiation were used. Lung toxicity was scored using the Common Toxicity Criteria version 3.0. A multivariate model as well as two single parameter models, including either V(20) or MLD, was built. Performance of the models was expressed as the AUC (Area Under the Curve). RESULTS: The mean MLD was 13.5 Gy (SD 4.5 Gy), while the mean V(20) was 21.0% (SD 7.3%). Univariate models with V(20) or MLD both yielded an AUC of 0.47. The final multivariate model, which included WHO-performance status, smoking status, forced expiratory volume (FEV(1)), age and MLD, yielded an AUC of 0.62 (95% CI: 0.55-0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Within the range of radiation doses used in our clinic, dosimetric parameters play a less important role than patient characteristics for the prediction of lung toxicity. Future research should focus more on patient-related factors, as opposed to dosimetric parameters, in order to identify patients at high risk for developing radiation-induced lung toxicity more accurately.
Authors: M Majem; J Hernández-Hernández; F Hernando-Trancho; N Rodríguez de Dios; A Sotoca; J C Trujillo-Reyes; I Vollmer; R Delgado-Bolton; M Provencio Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2019-06-06 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Jose L Lopez Guerra; Daniel R Gomez; Yan Zhuang; Lawrence B Levy; George Eapen; Hongmei Liu; Radhe Mohan; Ritsuko Komaki; James D Cox; Zhongxing Liao Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-03-13 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Mathilda L Bongers; Dirk de Ruysscher; Cary Oberije; Philippe Lambin; Carin A Uyl-de Groot; V M H Coupé Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2015-03-02 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: David N Teguh; Peter C Levendag; Wendimagegn Ghidey; Kees van Montfort; Stefan L S Kwa Journal: Dysphagia Date: 2013-01-26 Impact factor: 3.438
Authors: Jingbo Wang; Jianzhong Cao; Shuanghu Yuan; Wei Ji; Douglas Arenberg; Jianrong Dai; Paul Stanton; Daniel Tatro; Randall K Ten Haken; Luhua Wang; Feng-Ming Spring Kong Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-07-24 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Erik Roelofs; Lucas Persoon; Sebastiaan Nijsten; Wolfgang Wiessler; André Dekker; Philippe Lambin Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2013-02-05 Impact factor: 6.280