Literature DB >> 22516776

NTCP models for patient-rated xerostomia and sticky saliva after treatment with intensity modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancer: the role of dosimetric and clinical factors.

Ivo Beetz1, Cornelis Schilstra, Arjen van der Schaaf, Edwin R van den Heuvel, Patricia Doornaert, Peter van Luijk, Arjan Vissink, Bernard F A M van der Laan, Charles R Leemans, Henk P Bijl, Miranda E M C Christianen, Roel J H M Steenbakkers, Johannes A Langendijk.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this multicentre prospective study was to develop multivariable logistic regression models to make valid predictions about the risk of moderate-to-severe patient-rated xerostomia (XER(M6)) and sticky saliva 6 months (STIC(M6)) after primary treatment with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with or without chemotherapy for head and neck cancer (HNC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The study population was composed of 178 consecutive HNC patients treated with IMRT. All patients were included in a standard follow up programme in which acute and late side effects and quality of life were prospectively assessed, prior to, during and after treatment. The primary endpoints were XER(M6) and STIC(M6) as assessed by the EORTC QLQ-H&N35 after completing IMRT. Organs at risk (OARs) potentially involved in salivary function were delineated on planning-CT, including the parotid, submandibular and sublingual glands and the minor glands in the soft palate, cheeks and lips. Patients with moderate-to-severe xerostomia or sticky saliva, respectively, at baseline were excluded. The optimal number of variables for a multivariate logistic regression model was determined using a bootstrapping method.
RESULTS: Eventually, 51.6% of the cases suffered from XER(M6). The multivariate analysis showed that the mean contralateral parotid gland dose and baseline xerostomia (none vs. a bit) were the most important predictors for XER(M6). For the multivariate NTCP model, the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) was 0.68 (95% CI 0.60-0.76) and the discrimination slope was 0.10, respectively. Calibration was good with a calibration slope of 1.0. At 6 months after IMRT, 35.6% of the cases reported STIC(M6). The mean contralateral submandibular gland dose, the mean sublingual dose and the mean dose to the minor salivary glands located in the soft palate were most predictive for STIC(M6). For this model, the AUC was 0.70 (95% CI 0.61-0.78) and the discrimination slope was 0.12. Calibration was good with a calibration slope of 1.0.
CONCLUSIONS: The multivariable NTCP models presented in this paper can be used to predict patient-rated xerostomia and sticky saliva. The dose volume parameters included in the models can be used to further optimise IMRT treatment.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22516776     DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2012.03.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  46 in total

Review 1.  Revisiting the dose constraints for head and neck OARs in the current era of IMRT.

Authors:  N Patrik Brodin; Wolfgang A Tomé
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2018-09-08       Impact factor: 5.337

Review 2.  Predicting outcomes in radiation oncology--multifactorial decision support systems.

Authors:  Philippe Lambin; Ruud G P M van Stiphout; Maud H W Starmans; Emmanuel Rios-Velazquez; Georgi Nalbantov; Hugo J W L Aerts; Erik Roelofs; Wouter van Elmpt; Paul C Boutros; Pierluigi Granone; Vincenzo Valentini; Adrian C Begg; Dirk De Ruysscher; Andre Dekker
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 3.  The humanistic burden of head and neck cancer: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Erika Wissinger; Ingolf Griebsch; Juliane Lungershausen; Michael Byrnes; Karin Travers; Chris L Pashos
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Internal and external generalizability of temporal dose-response relationships for xerostomia following IMRT for head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Maria Thor; Adepitan A Owosho; Haley D Clark; Jung Hun Oh; Nadeem Riaz; Allan Hovan; Jillian Tsai; Steven D Thomas; Sae Hee K Yom; Jonn S Wu; Joseph M Huryn; Vitali Moiseenko; Nancy Y Lee; Cherry L Estilo; Joseph O Deasy
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2016-11-24       Impact factor: 6.280

5.  A Deep Learning Model for Predicting Xerostomia Due to Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma in the RTOG 0522 Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Kuo Men; Huaizhi Geng; Haoyu Zhong; Yong Fan; Alexander Lin; Ying Xiao
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2019-06-13       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 6.  Head and Neck Cancer Adaptive Radiation Therapy (ART): Conceptual Considerations for the Informed Clinician.

Authors:  Jolien Heukelom; Clifton David Fuller
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 5.934

7.  A Quantitative Clinical Decision-Support Strategy Identifying Which Patients With Oropharyngeal Head and Neck Cancer May Benefit the Most From Proton Radiation Therapy.

Authors:  N Patrik Brodin; Rafi Kabarriti; Mark Pankuch; Clyde B Schechter; Vinai Gondi; Shalom Kalnicki; Chandan Guha; Madhur K Garg; Wolfgang A Tomé
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Toward a model-based patient selection strategy for proton therapy: External validation of photon-derived normal tissue complication probability models in a head and neck proton therapy cohort.

Authors:  Pierre Blanchard; Andrew J Wong; G Brandon Gunn; Adam S Garden; Abdallah S R Mohamed; David I Rosenthal; Joseph Crutison; Richard Wu; Xiaodong Zhang; X Ronald Zhu; Radhe Mohan; Mayankkumar V Amin; C David Fuller; Steven J Frank
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 6.280

9.  Beyond mean pharyngeal constrictor dose for beam path toxicity in non-target swallowing muscles: Dose-volume correlates of chronic radiation-associated dysphagia (RAD) after oropharyngeal intensity modulated radiotherapy.

Authors: 
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 6.280

10.  Analysis of factors influencing the development of xerostomia during intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

Authors:  Ken Randall; Jason Stevens; Juan Fernando Yepes; Marcus E Randall; Mahesh Kudrimoti; Jonathan Feddock; Jing Xi; Richard J Kryscio; Craig S Miller
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol       Date:  2013-03-22
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.