PURPOSE: Our main purpose is to study the pattern of local failure for patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with conformal therapy. METHODS: This study included patients who failed locally and a matched group without failures after 3D conformal radiation per a radiation dose-escalation trial. Radiation doses ranged from 65.1 to 102.9 Gy in 2.1 Gy fractions, originally computed using an equivalent path length algorithm. The recurrent gross target volumes (RGTV) were contoured. The original and recurrent planning target volume (PTV and RPTV) were generated by 1 cm uniform expansion from GTV. DVHs and generalized equivalent uniform doses (EUD={Σ i (di ) a }1/a ) were computed. Marginal failures were defined for RGTVs covered by the original 10 to 90 % isodose surfaces. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the failed and control groups with regard to average original GTV volumes, GTV and PTV doses, and minimum PTV doses. Of the 18 RGTVs, four had marginal failure, 12 failed mostly within, and two failed outside of the original PTV. The mean EUDs were 57.1 Gy (95 % confidence interval (CI) 43.9-70.6) and 47.5 Gy (95 % CI 33.7-61.2), for the RGTVs and RPTVs, respectively, significantly below the prescribed doses (p=0.03). EUDs were less than 60 Gy for 39 % of the RGTVs and 56 % of the RPTVs. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrent tumors had significantly lower doses than the prescribed dose suggesting that some of these failures could have been avoided with modern technology such as 4D CT simulation and image-guided radiation therapy.
PURPOSE: Our main purpose is to study the pattern of local failure for patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with conformal therapy. METHODS: This study included patients who failed locally and a matched group without failures after 3D conformal radiation per a radiation dose-escalation trial. Radiation doses ranged from 65.1 to 102.9 Gy in 2.1 Gy fractions, originally computed using an equivalent path length algorithm. The recurrent gross target volumes (RGTV) were contoured. The original and recurrent planning target volume (PTV and RPTV) were generated by 1 cm uniform expansion from GTV. DVHs and generalized equivalent uniform doses (EUD={Σ i (di ) a }1/a ) were computed. Marginal failures were defined for RGTVs covered by the original 10 to 90 % isodose surfaces. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the failed and control groups with regard to average original GTV volumes, GTV and PTV doses, and minimum PTV doses. Of the 18 RGTVs, four had marginal failure, 12 failed mostly within, and two failed outside of the original PTV. The mean EUDs were 57.1 Gy (95 % confidence interval (CI) 43.9-70.6) and 47.5 Gy (95 % CI 33.7-61.2), for the RGTVs and RPTVs, respectively, significantly below the prescribed doses (p=0.03). EUDs were less than 60 Gy for 39 % of the RGTVs and 56 % of the RPTVs. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrent tumors had significantly lower doses than the prescribed dose suggesting that some of these failures could have been avoided with modern technology such as 4D CT simulation and image-guided radiation therapy.
Entities:
Keywords:
3D conformal radiation; Non-small cell lung cancer; Pattern of local failure
Authors: J A Hayman; M K Martel; R K Ten Haken; D P Normolle; R F Todd; J F Littles; M A Sullivan; P W Possert; A T Turrisi; A S Lichter Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-01-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Robert Timmerman; Rebecca Paulus; James Galvin; Jeffrey Michalski; William Straube; Jeffrey Bradley; Achilles Fakiris; Andrea Bezjak; Gregory Videtic; David Johnstone; Jack Fowler; Elizabeth Gore; Hak Choy Journal: JAMA Date: 2010-03-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: J M Watkins; A E Wahlquist; A J Zauls; E C Fields; E Garrett-Mayer; E G Aguero; G A Silvestri; A K Sharma Journal: J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 1.735
Authors: Mitchell Machtay; Kyounghwa Bae; Benjamin Movsas; Rebecca Paulus; Elizabeth M Gore; Ritsuko Komaki; Kathy Albain; William T Sause; Walter J Curran Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-10-25 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Feng-Ming Kong; Randall K Ten Haken; Matthew J Schipper; Molly A Sullivan; Ming Chen; Carlos Lopez; Gregory P Kalemkerian; James A Hayman Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-10-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Li Wang; Candace R Correa; Lujun Zhao; James Hayman; Gregory P Kalemkerian; Susan Lyons; Kemp Cease; Dean Brenner; Feng-Ming Kong Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-10-17 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Ramesh Rengan; Kenneth E Rosenzweig; Ennapadam Venkatraman; Lawrence A Koutcher; Jana L Fox; Reena Nayak; Howard Amols; Ellen Yorke; Andrew Jackson; C Clifton Ling; Steven A Leibel Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-11-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Samir Narayan; George T Henning; Randall K Ten Haken; Molly A Sullivan; Mary K Martel; James A Hayman Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: P Kumar; J Herndon; M Langer; L J Kohman; A D Elias; F C Kass; W L Eaton; S L Seagren; M R Green; D J Sugarbaker Journal: Cancer Date: 1996-06-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Feng-Ming Kong; Randall K Ten Haken; Matthew Schipper; Kirk A Frey; James Hayman; Milton Gross; Nithya Ramnath; Khaled A Hassan; Martha Matuszak; Timothy Ritter; Nan Bi; Weili Wang; Mark Orringer; Kemp B Cease; Theodore S Lawrence; Gregory P Kalemkerian Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-10-01 Impact factor: 31.777