PURPOSE: To develop an image analysis framework to delineate the physiological imaging-defined subvolumes of a tumor in relating to treatment response and outcome. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Our proposed approach delineates the subvolumes of a tumor based on its heterogeneous distributions of physiological imaging parameters. The method assigns each voxel a probabilistic membership function belonging to the physiological parameter classes defined in a sample of tumors, and then calculates the related subvolumes in each tumor. We applied our approach to regional cerebral blood volume (rCBV) and Gd-DTPA transfer constant (K(trans)) images of patients who had brain metastases and were treated by whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT). A total of 45 lesions were included in the analysis. Changes in the rCBV (or K(trans))-defined subvolumes of the tumors from pre-RT to 2 weeks after the start of WBRT (2W) were evaluated for differentiation of responsive, stable, and progressive tumors using the Mann-Whitney U test. Performance of the newly developed metrics for predicting tumor response to WBRT was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: The percentage decrease in the high-CBV-defined subvolumes of the tumors from pre-RT to 2W was significantly greater in the group of responsive tumors than in the group of stable and progressive tumors (P<.007). The change in the high-CBV-defined subvolumes of the tumors from pre-RT to 2W was a predictor for post-RT response significantly better than change in the gross tumor volume observed during the same time interval (P=.012), suggesting that the physiological change occurs before the volumetric change. Also, K(trans) did not add significant discriminatory information for assessing response with respect to rCBV. CONCLUSION: The physiological imaging-defined subvolumes of the tumors delineated by our method could be candidates for boost target, for which further development and evaluation is warranted. Published by Elsevier Inc.
PURPOSE: To develop an image analysis framework to delineate the physiological imaging-defined subvolumes of a tumor in relating to treatment response and outcome. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Our proposed approach delineates the subvolumes of a tumor based on its heterogeneous distributions of physiological imaging parameters. The method assigns each voxel a probabilistic membership function belonging to the physiological parameter classes defined in a sample of tumors, and then calculates the related subvolumes in each tumor. We applied our approach to regional cerebral blood volume (rCBV) and Gd-DTPA transfer constant (K(trans)) images of patients who had brain metastases and were treated by whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT). A total of 45 lesions were included in the analysis. Changes in the rCBV (or K(trans))-defined subvolumes of the tumors from pre-RT to 2 weeks after the start of WBRT (2W) were evaluated for differentiation of responsive, stable, and progressive tumors using the Mann-Whitney U test. Performance of the newly developed metrics for predicting tumor response to WBRT was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: The percentage decrease in the high-CBV-defined subvolumes of the tumors from pre-RT to 2W was significantly greater in the group of responsive tumors than in the group of stable and progressive tumors (P<.007). The change in the high-CBV-defined subvolumes of the tumors from pre-RT to 2W was a predictor for post-RT response significantly better than change in the gross tumor volume observed during the same time interval (P=.012), suggesting that the physiological change occurs before the volumetric change. Also, K(trans) did not add significant discriminatory information for assessing response with respect to rCBV. CONCLUSION: The physiological imaging-defined subvolumes of the tumors delineated by our method could be candidates for boost target, for which further development and evaluation is warranted. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: C C Ling; J Humm; S Larson; H Amols; Z Fuks; S Leibel; J A Koutcher Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-06-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Yue Cao; Vijaya Nagesh; Daniel Hamstra; Christina I Tsien; Brian D Ross; Thomas L Chenevert; Larry Junck; Theodore S Lawrence Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2006-09-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: P E Huber; H Hawighorst; M Fuss; G van Kaick; M F Wannenmacher; J Debus Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2001-04-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Craig J Galbán; Thomas L Chenevert; Charles R Meyer; Christina Tsien; Theodore S Lawrence; Daniel A Hamstra; Larry Junck; Pia C Sundgren; Timothy D Johnson; David J Ross; Alnawaz Rehemtulla; Brian D Ross Journal: Nat Med Date: 2009-04-19 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: P S Tofts; G Brix; D L Buckley; J L Evelhoch; E Henderson; M V Knopp; H B Larsson; T Y Lee; N A Mayr; G J Parker; R E Port; J Taylor; R M Weisskoff Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Hesheng Wang; Reza Farjam; Mary Feng; Hero Hussain; Randall K Ten Haken; Theodore S Lawrence; Yue Cao Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-03-07 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jia Wu; Michael F Gensheimer; Xinzhe Dong; Daniel L Rubin; Sandy Napel; Maximilian Diehn; Billy W Loo; Ruijiang Li Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2016-03-24 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Mingquan Lin; Jacob F Wynne; Boran Zhou; Tonghe Wang; Yang Lei; Walter J Curran; Tian Liu; Xiaofeng Yang Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2021-06-24 Impact factor: 2.102