Salma K Jabbour1, Sinae Kim2, Syed A Haider3, Xiaoting Xu4, Alson Wu3, Sujani Surakanti5, Joseph Aisner5, John Langenfeld6, Ning J Yue3, Bruce G Haffty3, Wei Zou3. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey. Electronic address: jabbousk@cinj.rutgers.edu. 2. Division of Biometrics, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey; Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey; Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Soochow, China. 5. Division of Medical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey. 6. Division of Surgery, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We sought to evaluate whether tumor response using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) performed as part of the routine care during chemoradiation therapy (CRT) could forecast the outcome of unresectable, locally advanced, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: We manually delineated primary tumor volumes (TV) of patients with NSCLC who were treated with radical CRT on days 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, 36, and 43 on CBCTs obtained as part of the standard radiation treatment course. Percentage reductions in TV were calculated and then correlated to survival and pattern of recurrence using Cox proportional hazard models. Clinical information including histologic subtype was also considered in the study of such associations. RESULTS: We evaluated 38 patients with a median follow-up time of 23.4 months. The median TV reduction was 39.3% (range, 7.3%-69.3%) from day 1 (D1) to day 43 (D43) CBCTs. Overall survival was associated with TV reduction from D1 to D43 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.557, 95% CI 0.39-0.79, P=.0009). For every 10% decrease in TV from D1 to D43, the risk of death decreased by 44.3%. For patients whose TV decreased ≥39.3 or <39.3%, log-rank test demonstrated a separation in survival (P=.02), with median survivals of 31 months versus 10 months, respectively. Neither local recurrence (HR 0.791, 95% CI 0.51-1.23, P=.29), nor distant recurrence (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.57-1.08, P=.137) correlated with TV decrease from D1 to D43. Histologic subtype showed no impact on our findings. CONCLUSIONS: TV reduction as determined by CBCT during CRT as part of routine care predicts post-CRT survival. Such knowledge may justify intensification of RT or application of additional therapies. Assessment of genomic characteristics of these tumors may permit a better understanding of behavior or prediction of therapeutic outcomes.
PURPOSE: We sought to evaluate whether tumor response using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) performed as part of the routine care during chemoradiation therapy (CRT) could forecast the outcome of unresectable, locally advanced, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: We manually delineated primary tumor volumes (TV) of patients with NSCLC who were treated with radical CRT on days 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, 36, and 43 on CBCTs obtained as part of the standard radiation treatment course. Percentage reductions in TV were calculated and then correlated to survival and pattern of recurrence using Cox proportional hazard models. Clinical information including histologic subtype was also considered in the study of such associations. RESULTS: We evaluated 38 patients with a median follow-up time of 23.4 months. The median TV reduction was 39.3% (range, 7.3%-69.3%) from day 1 (D1) to day 43 (D43) CBCTs. Overall survival was associated with TV reduction from D1 to D43 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.557, 95% CI 0.39-0.79, P=.0009). For every 10% decrease in TV from D1 to D43, the risk of death decreased by 44.3%. For patients whose TV decreased ≥39.3 or <39.3%, log-rank test demonstrated a separation in survival (P=.02), with median survivals of 31 months versus 10 months, respectively. Neither local recurrence (HR 0.791, 95% CI 0.51-1.23, P=.29), nor distant recurrence (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.57-1.08, P=.137) correlated with TV decrease from D1 to D43. Histologic subtype showed no impact on our findings. CONCLUSIONS: TV reduction as determined by CBCT during CRT as part of routine care predicts post-CRT survival. Such knowledge may justify intensification of RT or application of additional therapies. Assessment of genomic characteristics of these tumors may permit a better understanding of behavior or prediction of therapeutic outcomes.
Authors: Jana Fox; Eric Ford; Kristin Redmond; Jessica Zhou; John Wong; Danny Y Song Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-11-27 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Chandra P Belani; Hak Choy; Phil Bonomi; Charles Scott; Patrick Travis; John Haluschak; Walter J Curran Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-08-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: K Furuse; M Fukuoka; M Kawahara; H Nishikawa; Y Takada; S Kudoh; N Katagami; Y Ariyoshi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Walter J Curran; Rebecca Paulus; Corey J Langer; Ritsuko Komaki; Jin S Lee; Stephen Hauser; Benjamin Movsas; Todd Wasserman; Seth A Rosenthal; Elizabeth Gore; Mitchell Machtay; William Sause; James D Cox Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2011-09-08 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Christine A Iacobuzio-Donahue; Baojin Fu; Shinichi Yachida; Mingde Luo; Hisashi Abe; Clark M Henderson; Felip Vilardell; Zheng Wang; Jesse W Keller; Priya Banerjee; Joseph M Herman; John L Cameron; Charles J Yeo; Marc K Halushka; James R Eshleman; Marian Raben; Alison P Klein; Ralph H Hruban; Manuel Hidalgo; Daniel Laheru Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-03-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Inga S Grills; Geoffrey Hugo; Larry L Kestin; Ana Paula Galerani; K Kenneth Chao; Jennifer Wloch; Di Yan Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-10-29 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Feng-Ming Spring Kong; Kirk A Frey; Leslie E Quint; Randall K Ten Haken; James A Hayman; Marc Kessler; Indrin J Chetty; Daniel Normolle; Avraham Eisbruch; Theodore S Lawrence Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jeremy M Kilburn; Michael H Soike; John T Lucas; Diandra Ayala-Peacock; William Blackstock; Scott Isom; William T Kearns; William H Hinson; Antonius A Miller; William J Petty; Michael T Munley; James J Urbanic Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2015-10-22
Authors: Xenia Fave; Dennis Mackin; Jinzhong Yang; Joy Zhang; David Fried; Peter Balter; David Followill; Daniel Gomez; A Kyle Jones; Francesco Stingo; Jonas Fontenot; Laurence Court Journal: Med Phys Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Benedict Osorio; Nikhil Yegya-Raman; Sinae Kim; Charles B Simone; Christina Theodorou Ross; Matthew P Deek; Dakim Gaines; Wei Zou; Liyong Lin; Jyoti Malhotra; Ke Nie; Joseph Aisner; Salma K Jabbour Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2019-03