PURPOSE: Chest wall (CW) pain has recently been recognized as an important adverse effect of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We developed a dose-volume model to predict the development of this toxicity. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 126 patients with primary, clinically node-negative NSCLC received three to five fractions of SBRT to doses of 40-60 Gy and were prospectively followed. The dose-absolute volume histograms of two different definitions of the CW as an organ at risk (CW3cm and CW2cm) were examined for all 126 patients. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 16 months, the 2-year estimated actuarial incidence of Grade ≥ 2 CW pain was 39%. The median time to onset of Grade ≥ 2 CW pain (National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 3.0) was 9 months. There was no predictive advantage for biologically corrected dose over physical dose. Neither fraction number (p = 0.07) nor prescription dose (p = 0.07) were significantly correlated with the development of Grade ≥ 2 CW pain. Cox Proportional Hazards analysis identified significant correlation with a broad range of dose-volume combinations, with the CW volume receiving 30 Gy (V30) as one of the strongest predictors (p < 0.001). CW2cm consistently enabled better prediction of CW toxicity. When a physical dose of 30 Gy was received by more than 70 cm(3) of CW2cm, there was a significant correlation with Grade ≥ 2 CW pain (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: CW toxicity after SBRT is common and long-term follow-up is needed to identify affected patients. A volume of CW ≥ 70 cm(3) receiving 30 Gy is significantly correlated with Grade ≥ 2 CW pain. We are currently applying this constraint at our institution for patients receiving thoracic SBRT. An actuarial atlas of our data is provided as an electronic supplement to facilitate data-sharing and meta-analysis relating to CW pain. Copyright Â
PURPOSE: Chest wall (CW) pain has recently been recognized as an important adverse effect of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We developed a dose-volume model to predict the development of this toxicity. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 126 patients with primary, clinically node-negative NSCLC received three to five fractions of SBRT to doses of 40-60 Gy and were prospectively followed. The dose-absolute volume histograms of two different definitions of the CW as an organ at risk (CW3cm and CW2cm) were examined for all 126 patients. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 16 months, the 2-year estimated actuarial incidence of Grade ≥ 2 CW pain was 39%. The median time to onset of Grade ≥ 2 CW pain (National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 3.0) was 9 months. There was no predictive advantage for biologically corrected dose over physical dose. Neither fraction number (p = 0.07) nor prescription dose (p = 0.07) were significantly correlated with the development of Grade ≥ 2 CW pain. Cox Proportional Hazards analysis identified significant correlation with a broad range of dose-volume combinations, with the CW volume receiving 30 Gy (V30) as one of the strongest predictors (p < 0.001). CW2cm consistently enabled better prediction of CW toxicity. When a physical dose of 30 Gy was received by more than 70 cm(3) of CW2cm, there was a significant correlation with Grade ≥ 2 CW pain (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: CW toxicity after SBRT is common and long-term follow-up is needed to identify affected patients. A volume of CW ≥ 70 cm(3) receiving 30 Gy is significantly correlated with Grade ≥ 2 CW pain. We are currently applying this constraint at our institution for patients receiving thoracic SBRT. An actuarial atlas of our data is provided as an electronic supplement to facilitate data-sharing and meta-analysis relating to CW pain. Copyright Â
Authors: R Mohan; G Barest; L J Brewster; C S Chui; G J Kutcher; J S Laughlin; Z Fuks Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1988-08 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Natalya V Morrow; Christopher Stepaniak; Julia White; J Frank Wilson; X Allen Li Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Peter Fritz; Hans-Jörg Kraus; Thomas Blaschke; Werner Mühlnickel; Konstantin Strauch; Walburga Engel-Riedel; Assad Chemaissani; Erich Stoelben Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2007-11-28 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Brian T Collins; Kelly Erickson; Cristina A Reichner; Sean P Collins; Gregory J Gagnon; Sonja Dieterich; Don A McRae; Ying Zhang; Shadi Yousefi; Elliot Levy; Thomas Chang; Carlos Jamis-Dow; Filip Banovac; Eric D Anderson Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2007-10-22 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Michael Farris; Emory R McTyre; Catherine Okoukoni; Greg Dugan; Brendan J Johnson; A William Blackstock; Michael T Munley; J Daniel Bourland; J Mark Cline; Jeffrey S Willey Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2018-05-08 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: William R Kennedy; Prashant Gabani; John Nikitas; Clifford G Robinson; Jeffrey D Bradley; Michael C Roach Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2019-08-31 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Shaun U Din; Eric L Williams; Andrew Jackson; Kenneth E Rosenzweig; Abraham J Wu; Amanda Foster; Ellen D Yorke; Andreas Rimner Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-06-14 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Dawn Owen; Nadia N Laack; Charles S Mayo; Yolanda I Garces; Sean S Park; Heather J Bauer; Kathryn Nelson; Robert W Miller; Paul D Brown; Kenneth R Olivier Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2013-06-29
Authors: Franz Zehentmayr; Karl Wurstbauer; Heinz Deutschmann; Christoph Fussl; Peter Kopp; Karin Dagn; Gerd Fastner; Peter Porsch; Michael Studnicka; Felix Sedlmayer Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2014-09-23 Impact factor: 3.621