Literature DB >> 26025934

Imaging Radiation Doses and Associated Risks and Benefits in Subjects Participating in Breast Cancer Clinical Trials.

Rodrigo Fresco1, Gonzalo Spera2, Carlos Meyer2, Pablo Cabral2, John R Mackey2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Medical imaging is commonly required in breast cancer (BC) clinical trials to assess the efficacy and/or safety of study interventions. Despite the lack of definitive epidemiological data linking imaging radiation with cancer development in adults, concerns exist about the risks of imaging radiation-induced malignancies (IRIMs) in subjects exposed to repetitive imaging. We estimated the imaging radiation dose and IRIM risk in subjects participating in BC trials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The imaging protocol requirements in 10 phase III trials in the adjuvant and advanced settings were assessed to estimate the effective radiation dose received by a typical and fully compliant subject in each trial. For each study, the excess lifetime attributable cancer risk (LAR) was calculated using the National Cancer Institute's Radiation Risk Assessment Tool, version 3.7.1. Dose and risk calculations were performed for both imaging intensive and nonintensive approaches to reflect the variability in imaging performed within the studies.
RESULTS: The total effective imaging radiation dose was 0.4-262.2 mSv in adjuvant trials and 26-241.3 mSv in metastatic studies. The dose variability resulted from differing protocol requirements and imaging intensity approaches, with computed tomography, multigated acquisition scans, and bone scans as the major contributors. The mean LAR was 1.87-2,410/100,000 in adjuvant trials (IRIM: 0.0002%-2.41% of randomized subjects) and 6.9-67.3/100,000 in metastatic studies (IRIM: 0.007%-0.067% of subjects).
CONCLUSION: IRIMs are infrequent events. In adjuvant trials, aligning the protocol requirements with the clinical guidelines' surveillance recommendations and substituting radiating procedures with equivalent nonradiating ones would reduce IRIM risk. No significant risk has been observed in metastatic trials, and potential concerns on IRIMs are not justified. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Medical imaging is key in breast cancer (BC) clinical trials. Most of these procedures expose patients to ionizing radiation, and the risk of second cancer development after imaging has prompted recent concerns and controversy. Using accepted calculation models, the number of malignancies were estimated that were potentially attributable to the imaging procedures performed during a patient's participation in BC clinical trials. The results show that for patients participating in metastatic trials, the risk of imaging radiation-induced malignancies is negligible. In adjuvant trials, some second cancers due to imaging could be expected, and measures can be taken to reduce their risk. ©AlphaMed Press.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer trials; Imaging radiation; Imaging radiation-induced cancer; Imaging radiation-induced malignancy; Radiation dose; Radiation risks; Radiation-induced cancers

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26025934      PMCID: PMC4492226          DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2014-0295

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncologist        ISSN: 1083-7159


  54 in total

1.  Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer.

Authors:  José Baselga; Javier Cortés; Sung-Bae Kim; Seock-Ah Im; Roberto Hegg; Young-Hyuck Im; Laslo Roman; José Luiz Pedrini; Tadeusz Pienkowski; Adam Knott; Emma Clark; Mark C Benyunes; Graham Ross; Sandra M Swain
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  Does scientific evidence support a change from the LNT model for low-dose radiation risk extrapolation?

Authors:  Dietrich Averbeck
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.316

3.  Use of high technology imaging for surveillance of early stage breast cancer.

Authors:  K S Panageas; C S Sima; L Liberman; D Schrag
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-09-24       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  RadRAT: a radiation risk assessment tool for lifetime cancer risk projection.

Authors:  Amy Berrington de Gonzalez; A Iulian Apostoaei; Lene H S Veiga; Preetha Rajaraman; Brian A Thomas; F Owen Hoffman; Ethel Gilbert; Charles Land
Journal:  J Radiol Prot       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 1.394

Review 5.  Radiation risks of medical imaging: separating fact from fantasy.

Authors:  William R Hendee; Michael K O'Connor
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Use of diagnostic imaging studies and associated radiation exposure for patients enrolled in large integrated health care systems, 1996-2010.

Authors:  Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Diana L Miglioretti; Eric Johnson; Choonsik Lee; Heather Spencer Feigelson; Michael Flynn; Robert T Greenlee; Randell L Kruger; Mark C Hornbrook; Douglas Roblin; Leif I Solberg; Nicholas Vanneman; Sheila Weinmann; Andrew E Williams
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer.

Authors:  Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Jafi Lipson; Ralph Marcus; Kwang-Pyo Kim; Mahadevappa Mahesh; Robert Gould; Amy Berrington de González; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2009-12-14

8.  Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007.

Authors:  Amy Berrington de González; Mahadevappa Mahesh; Kwang-Pyo Kim; Mythreyi Bhargavan; Rebecca Lewis; Fred Mettler; Charles Land
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2009-12-14

Review 9.  Cancer and non-cancer effects in Japanese atomic bomb survivors.

Authors:  M P Little
Journal:  J Radiol Prot       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 1.394

Review 10.  The effects of excluding patients from the analysis in randomised controlled trials: meta-epidemiological study.

Authors:  Eveline Nüesch; Sven Trelle; Stephan Reichenbach; Anne W S Rutjes; Elizabeth Bürgi; Martin Scherer; Douglas G Altman; Peter Jüni
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2009-09-07
View more
  1 in total

1.  Projected lifetime cancer risks from occupational radiation exposure among diagnostic medical radiation workers in South Korea.

Authors:  Won Jin Lee; Yeongchull Choi; Seulki Ko; Eun Shil Cha; Jaeyoung Kim; Young Min Kim; Kyoung Ae Kong; Songwon Seo; Ye Jin Bang; Yae Won Ha
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 4.430

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.