Literature DB >> 25759423

Kinetic Models for Predicting Cervical Cancer Response to Radiation Therapy on Individual Basis Using Tumor Regression Measured In Vivo With Volumetric Imaging.

Antonella Belfatto1, Marco Riboldi2, Delia Ciardo3, Federica Cattani3, Agnese Cecconi3, Roberta Lazzari3, Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa4, Roberto Orecchia5, Guido Baroni2, Pietro Cerveri2.   

Abstract

This article describes a macroscopic mathematical modeling approach to capture the interplay between solid tumor evolution and cell damage during radiotherapy. Volume regression profiles of 15 patients with uterine cervical cancer were reconstructed from serial cone-beam computed tomography data sets, acquired for image-guided radiotherapy, and used for model parameter learning by means of a genetic-based optimization. Patients, diagnosed with either squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma, underwent different treatment modalities (image-guided radiotherapy and image-guided chemo-radiotherapy). The mean volume at the beginning of radiotherapy and the end of radiotherapy was on average 23.7 cm(3) (range: 12.7-44.4 cm(3)) and 8.6 cm(3) (range: 3.6-17.1 cm(3)), respectively. Two different tumor dynamics were taken into account in the model: the viable (active) and the necrotic cancer cells. However, according to the results of a preliminary volume regression analysis, we assumed a short dead cell resolving time and the model was simplified to the active tumor volume. Model learning was performed both on the complete patient cohort (cohort-based model learning) and on each single patient (patient-specific model learning). The fitting results (mean error: ∼ 16% and ∼ 6% for the cohort-based model and patient-specific model, respectively) highlighted the model ability to quantitatively reproduce tumor regression. Volume prediction errors of about 18% on average were obtained using cohort-based model computed on all but 1 patient at a time (leave-one-out technique). Finally, a sensitivity analysis was performed and the data uncertainty effects evaluated by simulating an average volume perturbation of about 1.5 cm(3) obtaining an error increase within 0.2%. In conclusion, we showed that simple time-continuous models can represent tumor regression curves both on a patient cohort and patient-specific basis; this discloses the opportunity in the future to exploit such models to predict how changes in the treatment schedule (number of fractions, doses, intervals among fractions) might affect the tumor regression on an individual basis.
© The Author(s) 2015.

Entities:  

Keywords:  image-guided radiotherapy; linear-quadratic model; radiosensitivity; tumor mathematical modeling; uterine cervical cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25759423     DOI: 10.1177/1533034615573796

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 1533-0338


  6 in total

1.  Radiosensitivity in HeLa cervical cancer cells overexpressing glutathione S-transferase π 1.

Authors:  Liang Yang; Ren Liu; Hong-Bin Ma; Ming-Zhen Ying; Ya-Jie Wang
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 2.967

2.  Regulatory effects of COL1A1 on apoptosis induced by radiation in cervical cancer cells.

Authors:  Shurong Liu; Gewang Liao; Guowen Li
Journal:  Cancer Cell Int       Date:  2017-07-28       Impact factor: 5.722

3.  Tumor radio-sensitivity assessment by means of volume data and magnetic resonance indices measured on prostate tumor bearing rats.

Authors:  Antonella Belfatto; Derek A White; Ralph P Mason; Zhang Zhang; Strahinja Stojadinovic; Guido Baroni; Pietro Cerveri
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Model-Supported Radiotherapy Personalization: In silico Test of Hyper- and Hypo-Fractionation Effects.

Authors:  Antonella Belfatto; Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa; Guido Baroni; Pietro Cerveri
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2018-10-15       Impact factor: 4.566

5.  Studying the regression profiles of cervical tumours during radiotherapy treatment using a patient-specific multiscale model.

Authors:  Christos A Kyroudis; Dimitra D Dionysiou; Eleni A Kolokotroni; Georgios S Stamatakos
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  IMRT and brachytherapy comparison in gynaecological cancer treatment: thinking over dosimetry and radiobiology.

Authors:  Valentina Pinzi; Valeria Landoni; Federica Cattani; Roberta Lazzari; Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa; Roberto Orecchia
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2019-12-17
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.