David B Shultz1, Nicholas Trakul1, Jonathan A Abelson1, James D Murphy1, Peter G Maxim2, Quynh-Thu Le2, Billy W Loo2, Maximilian Diehn3. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA; Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA. Electronic address: mdiehn@gmail.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/ BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to identify imaging-based predictors of progression in patients treated with SABR for stage I NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between March 2003 and December 2012, 117 patients with stage I NSCLC meeting our study criteria were treated with SABR at Stanford University. Median follow-up was 17 months (range, 3-74 months) for all patients and 19 months for living patients (range, 3-74 months). Tumors were classified according to whether or not they contacted the pleura adjacent to the chest wall or mediastinum (MP), according to their maximum dimension based on computed tomography scans, and, for 102 patients who had archived pretreatment fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography scans, according to SUVmax. RESULTS: Ten patients (9%) developed local progression, 17 (15%) developed regional progression, and 19 (16%) developed distant metastasis. Two-year freedom from local progression, freedom from regional progression, and freedom from distant metastasis (FFDM) were 88%, 83%, and 83%, respectively. Overall survival was 70% at 2 years. FFDM was significantly associated with MP contact, maximum tumor dimension, and SUVmax, and these variables could be combined into an exploratory prognostic index that identified patients at highest risk for developing metastases. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, noninvasive, imaging-based features were associated with distant progression after SABR for early stage NSCLC. If validated, our prognostic index could allow identification of patients who might benefit from systemic therapy after SABR. Published by Elsevier Inc.
INTRODUCTION/ BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to identify imaging-based predictors of progression in patients treated with SABR for stage I NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between March 2003 and December 2012, 117 patients with stage I NSCLC meeting our study criteria were treated with SABR at Stanford University. Median follow-up was 17 months (range, 3-74 months) for all patients and 19 months for living patients (range, 3-74 months). Tumors were classified according to whether or not they contacted the pleura adjacent to the chest wall or mediastinum (MP), according to their maximum dimension based on computed tomography scans, and, for 102 patients who had archived pretreatment fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography scans, according to SUVmax. RESULTS: Ten patients (9%) developed local progression, 17 (15%) developed regional progression, and 19 (16%) developed distant metastasis. Two-year freedom from local progression, freedom from regional progression, and freedom from distant metastasis (FFDM) were 88%, 83%, and 83%, respectively. Overall survival was 70% at 2 years. FFDM was significantly associated with MP contact, maximum tumor dimension, and SUVmax, and these variables could be combined into an exploratory prognostic index that identified patients at highest risk for developing metastases. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, noninvasive, imaging-based features were associated with distant progression after SABR for early stage NSCLC. If validated, our prognostic index could allow identification of patients who might benefit from systemic therapy after SABR. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Entities:
Keywords:
Early stage; FDG-PET; Prognostic; SABR; Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)
Authors: Sarah A Mattonen; Shyama Tetar; David A Palma; Alexander V Louie; Suresh Senan; Aaron D Ward Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2015-11-12
Authors: Zachary A Kohutek; Abraham J Wu; Zhigang Zhang; Amanda Foster; Shaun U Din; Ellen D Yorke; Robert Downey; Kenneth E Rosenzweig; Wolfgang A Weber; Andreas Rimner Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2015-05-28 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Pierre Starkov; Todd A Aguilera; Daniel I Golden; David B Shultz; Nicholas Trakul; Peter G Maxim; Quynh-Thu Le; Billy W Loo; Maximillan Diehn; Adrien Depeursinge; Daniel L Rubin Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Olya Grove; Anders E Berglund; Matthew B Schabath; Hugo J W L Aerts; Andre Dekker; Hua Wang; Emmanuel Rios Velazquez; Philippe Lambin; Yuhua Gu; Yoganand Balagurunathan; Edward Eikman; Robert A Gatenby; Steven Eschrich; Robert J Gillies Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-03-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ilke Tunali; Olya Stringfield; Albert Guvenis; Hua Wang; Ying Liu; Yoganand Balagurunathan; Philippe Lambin; Robert J Gillies; Matthew B Schabath Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2017-10-06