Tyler J Bradshaw1, Stephen Yip1, Ngoneh Jallow1, Lisa J Forrest2, Robert Jeraj3. 1. Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. 2. Department of Surgical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. 3. Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin; Department of Human Oncology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. Electronic address: rjeraj@wisc.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In dose painting, in which functional imaging is used to define biological targets for radiation therapy dose escalation, changes in spatial distributions of biological properties during treatment can compromise the quality of therapy. The goal of this study was to assess the spatiotemporal stability of 2 potential dose painting targets--hypoxia and proliferation--in canine tumors during radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-two canine patients with sinonasal tumors (14 carcinoma and 8 sarcoma) were imaged before hypofractionated radiation therapy with copper(II)-diacetyl-bis(N4-methylthiosemicarbazone) (Cu-ATSM) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for hypoxia and 3'-deoxy-3'-(18)F-fluorothymidine (FLT) PET/CT for proliferation. The FLT scans were repeated after 2 fractions and the Cu-ATSM scans after 3 fractions. Midtreatment PET/CT images were deformably registered to pretreatment PET/CT images. Voxel-based Spearman correlation coefficients quantified the spatial stability of Cu-ATSM and FLT uptake distributions between pretreatment and midtreatment scans. Paired t tests determined significant differences between the patients' respective Cu-ATSM and FLT correlations coefficients. Standardized uptake value measures were also compared between pretreatment and midtreatment scans by use of paired t tests. RESULTS: Spatial distributions of Cu-ATSM and FLT uptake were stable through midtreatment for both sarcomas and carcinomas: the population mean ± standard deviation in Spearman correlation coefficient was 0.88 ± 0.07 for Cu-ATSM and 0.79 ± 0.13 for FLT. The patients' Cu-ATSM correlation coefficients were significantly higher than their respective FLT correlation coefficients (P=.001). Changes in Cu-ATSM SUV measures from pretreatment to midtreatment were histology dependent: carcinomas experienced significant decreases in Cu-ATSM uptake (P<.05), whereas sarcomas did not (P>.20). Both histologies experienced significant decreases in FLT uptake (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Spatial distributions of Cu-ATSM were very stable after a few fractions of radiation therapy. FLT spatial distributions were generally stable early in therapy, although they were significantly less stable than Cu-ATSM distributions. Canine tumors had significantly lower proliferative activity at midtreatment than at pretreatment, and they experienced histology-dependent changes in Cu-ATSM uptake.
PURPOSE: In dose painting, in which functional imaging is used to define biological targets for radiation therapy dose escalation, changes in spatial distributions of biological properties during treatment can compromise the quality of therapy. The goal of this study was to assess the spatiotemporal stability of 2 potential dose painting targets--hypoxia and proliferation--in caninetumors during radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-two caninepatients with sinonasal tumors (14 carcinoma and 8 sarcoma) were imaged before hypofractionated radiation therapy with copper(II)-diacetyl-bis(N4-methylthiosemicarbazone) (Cu-ATSM) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for hypoxia and 3'-deoxy-3'-(18)F-fluorothymidine (FLT) PET/CT for proliferation. The FLT scans were repeated after 2 fractions and the Cu-ATSM scans after 3 fractions. Midtreatment PET/CT images were deformably registered to pretreatment PET/CT images. Voxel-based Spearman correlation coefficients quantified the spatial stability of Cu-ATSM and FLT uptake distributions between pretreatment and midtreatment scans. Paired t tests determined significant differences between the patients' respective Cu-ATSM and FLT correlations coefficients. Standardized uptake value measures were also compared between pretreatment and midtreatment scans by use of paired t tests. RESULTS: Spatial distributions of Cu-ATSM and FLT uptake were stable through midtreatment for both sarcomas and carcinomas: the population mean ± standard deviation in Spearman correlation coefficient was 0.88 ± 0.07 for Cu-ATSM and 0.79 ± 0.13 for FLT. The patients' Cu-ATSM correlation coefficients were significantly higher than their respective FLT correlation coefficients (P=.001). Changes in Cu-ATSM SUV measures from pretreatment to midtreatment were histology dependent: carcinomas experienced significant decreases in Cu-ATSM uptake (P<.05), whereas sarcomas did not (P>.20). Both histologies experienced significant decreases in FLT uptake (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Spatial distributions of Cu-ATSM were very stable after a few fractions of radiation therapy. FLT spatial distributions were generally stable early in therapy, although they were significantly less stable than Cu-ATSM distributions. Caninetumors had significantly lower proliferative activity at midtreatment than at pretreatment, and they experienced histology-dependent changes in Cu-ATSM uptake.
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: Joseph A O'Donoghue; Pat Zanzonico; Andrei Pugachev; Bixiu Wen; Peter Smith-Jones; Shangde Cai; Eva Burnazi; Ronald D Finn; Paul Burgman; Shutian Ruan; Jason S Lewis; Michael J Welch; C Clifton Ling; John L Humm Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-04-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: K S Clifford Chao; Gokhan Ozyigit; Binh N Tran; Mustafa Cengiz; James F Dempsey; Daniel A Low Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2003-02-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Indrin J Chetty; Mary K Martel; David A Jaffray; Stanley H Benedict; Stephen M Hahn; Ross Berbeco; James Deye; Robert Jeraj; Brian Kavanagh; Sunil Krishnan; Nancy Lee; Daniel A Low; David Mankoff; Lawrence B Marks; Daniel Ollendorf; Harald Paganetti; Brian Ross; Ramon Alfredo C Siochi; Robert D Timmerman; John W Wong Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-07-11 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Kamilla Westarp Zornhagen; Malene M Clausen; Anders E Hansen; Ian Law; Fintan J McEvoy; Svend A Engelholm; Andreas Kjær; Annemarie T Kristensen Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2015-09-11
Authors: Mark Gray; James Meehan; Arran K Turnbull; Carlos Martínez-Pérez; Charlene Kay; Lisa Y Pang; David J Argyle Journal: Front Vet Sci Date: 2020-11-12