Rachel Zhou1, Angela Ng1, Louis S Constine2, Marilyn Stovall3, Gregory T Armstrong4, Joseph P Neglia5, Debra L Friedman6, Kara Kelly7, Thomas J FitzGerald8, David C Hodgson9. 1. Department of Radiation Therapy, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York. 3. Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 4. Epidemiology/Cancer Control Department, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee. 5. Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 6. Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee. 7. Division of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology/Stem Cell Transplant, Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. 8. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts; Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Group, Lincoln, Rhode Island. 9. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: David.hodgson@rmp.uhn.on.ca.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Survivors of pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) are recognized to have an increased risk of delayed adverse health outcomes related to radiation therapy (RT). However, the necessary latency required to observe these late effects means that the estimated risks apply to outdated treatments. We sought to compare the normal tissue dose received by children treated for HL and enrolled in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) (diagnosed 1970-1986) with that of patients treated in recent Children's Oncology Group (COG) trials (enrolled 2002-2012). METHODS AND MATERIALS: RT planning data were obtained for 50 HL survivors randomly sampled from the CCSS cohort and applied to computed tomography planning data sets to reconstruct the normal tissue dosimetry. For comparison, the normal tissue dosimetry data were obtained for all 191 patients with full computed tomography-based volumetric RT planning on COG protocols AHOD0031 and AHOD0831. RESULTS: For early-stage patients, the mean female breast dose in the COG patients was on average 83.5% lower than that for CCSS patients, with an absolute reduction of 15.5 Gy. For advanced-stage patients, the mean breast dose was decreased on average by 70% (11.6 Gy average absolute dose reduction). The mean heart dose decreased on average by 22.9 Gy (68.6%) and 17.6 Gy (56.8%) for early- and advanced-stage patients, respectively. All dose comparisons for breast, heart, lung, and thyroid were significantly lower for patients in the COG trials than for the CCSS participants. Reductions in the prescribed dose were a major contributor to these dose reductions. CONCLUSIONS: These are the first data quantifying the significant reduction in the normal tissue dose using actual, rather than hypothetical, treatment plans for children with HL. These findings provide useful information when counseling families regarding the risks of contemporary RT.
PURPOSE: Survivors of pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) are recognized to have an increased risk of delayed adverse health outcomes related to radiation therapy (RT). However, the necessary latency required to observe these late effects means that the estimated risks apply to outdated treatments. We sought to compare the normal tissue dose received by children treated for HL and enrolled in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) (diagnosed 1970-1986) with that of patients treated in recent Children's Oncology Group (COG) trials (enrolled 2002-2012). METHODS AND MATERIALS: RT planning data were obtained for 50 HL survivors randomly sampled from the CCSS cohort and applied to computed tomography planning data sets to reconstruct the normal tissue dosimetry. For comparison, the normal tissue dosimetry data were obtained for all 191 patients with full computed tomography-based volumetric RT planning on COG protocols AHOD0031 and AHOD0831. RESULTS: For early-stage patients, the mean female breast dose in the COGpatients was on average 83.5% lower than that for CCSS patients, with an absolute reduction of 15.5 Gy. For advanced-stage patients, the mean breast dose was decreased on average by 70% (11.6 Gy average absolute dose reduction). The mean heart dose decreased on average by 22.9 Gy (68.6%) and 17.6 Gy (56.8%) for early- and advanced-stage patients, respectively. All dose comparisons for breast, heart, lung, and thyroid were significantly lower for patients in the COG trials than for the CCSS participants. Reductions in the prescribed dose were a major contributor to these dose reductions. CONCLUSIONS: These are the first data quantifying the significant reduction in the normal tissue dose using actual, rather than hypothetical, treatment plans for children with HL. These findings provide useful information when counseling families regarding the risks of contemporary RT.
Authors: Igor Shuryak; Philip Hahnfeldt; Lynn Hlatky; Rainer K Sachs; David J Brenner Journal: Radiat Environ Biophys Date: 2009-06-05 Impact factor: 1.925
Authors: Marie L De Bruin; Judith Sparidans; Mars B van't Veer; Evert M Noordijk; Marieke W J Louwman; Josée M Zijlstra; Hendrik van den Berg; Nicola S Russell; Annegien Broeks; Margreet H A Baaijens; Berthe M P Aleman; Flora E van Leeuwen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-08-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Chaya S Moskowitz; Joanne F Chou; Suzanne L Wolden; Jonine L Bernstein; Jyoti Malhotra; Danielle Novetsky Friedman; Nidha Z Mubdi; Wendy M Leisenring; Marilyn Stovall; Sue Hammond; Susan A Smith; Tara O Henderson; John D Boice; Melissa M Hudson; Lisa R Diller; Smita Bhatia; Lisa B Kenney; Joseph P Neglia; Colin B Begg; Leslie L Robison; Kevin C Oeffinger Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-04-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Debra L Friedman; Lu Chen; Suzanne Wolden; Allen Buxton; Kathleen McCarten; Thomas J FitzGerald; Sandra Kessel; Pedro A De Alarcon; Allen R Chen; Nathan Kobrinsky; Peter Ehrlich; Robert E Hutchison; Louis S Constine; Cindy L Schwartz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-10-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Peter D Inskip; Leslie L Robison; Marilyn Stovall; Susan A Smith; Sue Hammond; Ann C Mertens; John A Whitton; Lisa Diller; Lisa Kenney; Sarah S Donaldson; Anna T Meadows; Joseph P Neglia Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Angela Ng; Kristy K Brock; Michael B Sharpe; Joanne L Moseley; Tim Craig; David C Hodgson Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-08-25 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Anna T Meadows; Debra L Friedman; Joseph P Neglia; Ann C Mertens; Sarah S Donaldson; Marilyn Stovall; Sue Hammond; Yutaka Yasui; Peter D Inskip Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-03-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Debra L Friedman; John Whitton; Wendy Leisenring; Ann C Mertens; Sue Hammond; Marilyn Stovall; Sarah S Donaldson; Anna T Meadows; Leslie L Robison; Joseph P Neglia Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2010-07-15 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: James E Bates; Rebecca M Howell; Qi Liu; Yutaka Yasui; Daniel A Mulrooney; Sughosh Dhakal; Susan A Smith; Wendy M Leisenring; Daniel J Indelicato; Todd M Gibson; Gregory T Armstrong; Kevin C Oeffinger; Louis S Constine Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-03-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Susan K Parsons; Michael J Kelly; Joshua T Cohen; Sharon M Castellino; Tara O Henderson; Kara M Kelly; Frank G Keller; Tobi J Henzer; Anita J Kumar; Peter Johnson; Ralph M Meyer; John Radford; John Raemaekers; David C Hodgson; Andrew M Evens Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2018-04-29 Impact factor: 6.998
Authors: Linda Rossi; Patricia Cambraia Lopes; Joana Marques Leitão; Cecile Janus; Marjan van de Pol; Sebastiaan Breedveld; Joan Penninkhof; Ben J M Heijmen Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-04-15 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Matthew D Hall; Stephanie A Terezakis; John T Lucas; Eve Gallop-Evans; Karin Dieckmann; Louis S Constine; David Hodgson; Jamie E Flerlage; Monika L Metzger; Bradford S Hoppe Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2021-08-12 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Sachin R Jhawar; Zorimar Rivera-Núñez; Richard Drachtman; Peter D Cole; Bradford S Hoppe; Rahul R Parikh Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 31.777