Literature DB >> 22583606

Normal tissue complication probability modeling of radiation-induced hypothyroidism after head-and-neck radiation therapy.

Mohsen Bakhshandeh1, Bijan Hashemi, Seied Rabi Mehdi Mahdavi, Alireza Nikoofar, Maryam Vasheghani, Anoshirvan Kazemnejad.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the dose-response relationship of the thyroid for radiation-induced hypothyroidism in head-and-neck radiation therapy, according to 6 normal tissue complication probability models, and to find the best-fit parameters of the models. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixty-five patients treated with primary or postoperative radiation therapy for various cancers in the head-and-neck region were prospectively evaluated. Patient serum samples (tri-iodothyronine, thyroxine, thyroid-stimulating hormone [TSH], free tri-iodothyronine, and free thyroxine) were measured before and at regular time intervals until 1 year after the completion of radiation therapy. Dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of the patients' thyroid gland were derived from their computed tomography (CT)-based treatment planning data. Hypothyroidism was defined as increased TSH (subclinical hypothyroidism) or increased TSH in combination with decreased free thyroxine and thyroxine (clinical hypothyroidism). Thyroid DVHs were converted to 2 Gy/fraction equivalent doses using the linear-quadratic formula with α/β = 3 Gy. The evaluated models included the following: Lyman with the DVH reduced to the equivalent uniform dose (EUD), known as LEUD; Logit-EUD; mean dose; relative seriality; individual critical volume; and population critical volume models. The parameters of the models were obtained by fitting the patients' data using a maximum likelihood analysis method. The goodness of fit of the models was determined by the 2-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Ranking of the models was made according to Akaike's information criterion.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (44.6%) experienced hypothyroidism. None of the models was rejected according to the evaluation of the goodness of fit. The mean dose model was ranked as the best model on the basis of its Akaike's information criterion value. The D(50) estimated from the models was approximately 44 Gy.
CONCLUSIONS: The implemented normal tissue complication probability models showed a parallel architecture for the thyroid. The mean dose model can be used as the best model to describe the dose-response relationship for hypothyroidism complication.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22583606     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.03.034

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


  19 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

2.  Nomogram for radiation-induced hypothyroidism prediction in nasopharyngeal carcinoma after treatment.

Authors:  Ren Luo; Mei Li; Zhining Yang; Yizhou Zhan; Baotian Huang; Jiayang Lu; Zhenxi Xu; Zhixiong Lin
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-11-25       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 3.  European Laryngological Society: ELS recommendations for the follow-up of patients treated for laryngeal cancer.

Authors:  Ricard Simo; Patrick Bradley; Dominique Chevalier; Frederik Dikkers; Hans Eckel; Nayla Matar; Giorgio Peretti; Cesare Piazza; Mark Remacle; Miquel Quer
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-03-09       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  The relationship between thyroid dose and diagnosis of primary hypothyroidism in pediatric brain tumor patients receiving craniospinal irradiation.

Authors:  Christine Lauro; Margaret E Macy; Philip Zeitler; Jennifer Backus; Pamela Mettler; Nicholas Foreman; Arthur K Liu
Journal:  J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.634

5.  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

Review 6.  Post-therapeutic surveillance strategies in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Antoine Digonnet; Marc Hamoir; Guy Andry; Missak Haigentz; Robert P Takes; Carl E Silver; Dana M Hartl; Primož Strojan; Alessandra Rinaldo; Remco de Bree; Andreas Dietz; Vincent Grégoire; Vinidh Paleri; Johannes A Langendijk; Vincent Vander Poorten; Michael L Hinni; Juan P Rodrigo; Carlos Suárez; William M Mendenhall; Jochen A Werner; Eric M Genden; Alfio Ferlito
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2012-09-13       Impact factor: 2.503

7.  Systematic Review of Normal Tissue Complication Models Relevant to Standard Fractionation Radiation Therapy of the Head and Neck Region Published After the QUANTEC Reports.

Authors:  N Patrik Brodin; Rafi Kabarriti; Madhur K Garg; Chandan Guha; Wolfgang A Tomé
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2017-09-29       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Use of gEUD for predicting ear and pituitary gland damage following proton and photon radiation therapy.

Authors:  L De Marzi; L Feuvret; T Boulé; J-L Habrand; F Martin; V Calugaru; N Fournier-Bidoz; R Ferrand; A Mazal
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-02-11       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 9.  Radiogenomics: Identification of Genomic Predictors for Radiation Toxicity.

Authors:  Barry S Rosenstein
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 5.934

10.  Normal tissue complication probability modeling for cochlea constraints to avoid causing tinnitus after head-and-neck intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Authors:  Tsair-Fwu Lee; Shyh-An Yeh; Pei-Ju Chao; Liyun Chang; Chien-Liang Chiu; Hui-Min Ting; Hung-Yu Wang; Yu-Jie Huang
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-09-17       Impact factor: 3.481

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.