Sarah M McGuire1, Sudershan K Bhatia2, Wenqing Sun2, Geraldine M Jacobson3, Yusuf Menda4, Laura L Ponto4, Brian J Smith5, Brandie A Gross2, John E Bayouth6, John J Sunderland4, Michael M Graham4, John M Buatti2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa. Electronic address: sarah-mcguire@uiowa.edu. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia. 4. Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa. 5. Department of Biostatistics, University of Iowa College of Public Health, Iowa City, Iowa. 6. Department of Human Oncology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of the present prospective clinical trial was to determine the efficacy of [(18)F]fluorothymidine (FLT)-identified active bone marrow sparing for pelvic cancer patients by correlating the FLT uptake change during and after chemoradiation therapy with hematologic toxicity. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Simulation FLT positron emission tomography (PET) images were used to spare pelvic bone marrow using intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT BMS) for 32 patients with pelvic cancer. FLT PET scans taken during chemoradiation therapy after 1 and 2 weeks and 30 days and 1 year after completion of chemoradiation therapy were used to evaluate the acute and chronic dose response of pelvic bone marrow. Complete blood counts were recorded at each imaging point to correlate the FLT uptake change with systemic hematologic toxicity. RESULTS: IMRT BMS plans significantly reduced the dose to the pelvic regions identified with FLT uptake compared with control IMRT plans (P<.001, paired t test). Radiation doses of 4 Gy caused an ∼50% decrease in FLT uptake in the pelvic bone marrow after either 1 or 2 weeks of chemoradiation therapy. Additionally, subjects with more FLT-identified bone marrow exposed to ≥4 Gy after 1 week developed grade 2 leukopenia sooner than subjects with less marrow exposed to ≥4 Gy (P<.05, Cox regression analysis). Apparent bone marrow recovery at 30 days after therapy was not maintained 1 year after chemotherapy. The FLT uptake in the pelvic bone marrow regions that received >35 Gy was 18.8% ± 1.8% greater at 30 days after therapy than at 1 year after therapy. The white blood cell, platelet, lymphocyte, and neutrophil counts at 1 year after therapy were all lower than the pretherapy levels (P<.05, paired t test). CONCLUSIONS: IMRT BMS plans reduced the dose to FLT-identified pelvic bone marrow for pelvic cancer patients. However, reducing hematologic toxicity is challenging owing to the acute radiation sensitivity (∼4 Gy) and chronic suppression of activity in bone marrow receiving radiation doses >35 Gy, as measured by the FLT uptake change correlated with the complete blood cell counts.
PURPOSE: The purpose of the present prospective clinical trial was to determine the efficacy of [(18)F]fluorothymidine (FLT)-identified active bone marrow sparing for pelvic cancerpatients by correlating the FLT uptake change during and after chemoradiation therapy with hematologic toxicity. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Simulation FLT positron emission tomography (PET) images were used to spare pelvic bone marrow using intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT BMS) for 32 patients with pelvic cancer. FLT PET scans taken during chemoradiation therapy after 1 and 2 weeks and 30 days and 1 year after completion of chemoradiation therapy were used to evaluate the acute and chronic dose response of pelvic bone marrow. Complete blood counts were recorded at each imaging point to correlate the FLT uptake change with systemic hematologic toxicity. RESULTS: IMRT BMS plans significantly reduced the dose to the pelvic regions identified with FLT uptake compared with control IMRT plans (P<.001, paired t test). Radiation doses of 4 Gy caused an ∼50% decrease in FLT uptake in the pelvic bone marrow after either 1 or 2 weeks of chemoradiation therapy. Additionally, subjects with more FLT-identified bone marrow exposed to ≥4 Gy after 1 week developed grade 2 leukopenia sooner than subjects with less marrow exposed to ≥4 Gy (P<.05, Cox regression analysis). Apparent bone marrow recovery at 30 days after therapy was not maintained 1 year after chemotherapy. The FLT uptake in the pelvic bone marrow regions that received >35 Gy was 18.8% ± 1.8% greater at 30 days after therapy than at 1 year after therapy. The white blood cell, platelet, lymphocyte, and neutrophil counts at 1 year after therapy were all lower than the pretherapy levels (P<.05, paired t test). CONCLUSIONS: IMRT BMS plans reduced the dose to FLT-identified pelvic bone marrow for pelvic cancerpatients. However, reducing hematologic toxicity is challenging owing to the acute radiation sensitivity (∼4 Gy) and chronic suppression of activity in bone marrow receiving radiation doses >35 Gy, as measured by the FLT uptake change correlated with the complete blood cell counts.
Authors: James A Hayman; Jason W Callahan; Alan Herschtal; Sarah Everitt; David S Binns; Rod J Hicks; Michael Mac Manus Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Clark J Brixey; John C Roeske; Anthony E Lujan; S Diane Yamada; Jacob Rotmensch; Arno J Mundt Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Eric Dinges; Nicole Felderman; Sarah McGuire; Brandie Gross; Sudershan Bhatia; Sarah Mott; John Buatti; Dongxu Wang Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Sarah M McGuire; Yusuf Menda; Laura L Boles Ponto; Brandie Gross; John Buatti; John E Bayouth Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-02-06 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: William Y Song; Soon N Huh; Yun Liang; Greg White; R Charles Nichols; W Tyler Watkins; Arno J Mundt; Loren K Mell Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2010-08-15 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Sarah M McGuire; Yusuf Menda; Laura L Boles Ponto; Brandie Gross; Mindi TenNapel; Brian J Smith; John E Bayouth Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2014-07-08 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Xiaofan Xiong; Brian J Smith; Stephen A Graves; John J Sunderland; Michael M Graham; Brandie A Gross; John M Buatti; Reinhard R Beichel Journal: Med Phys Date: 2022-01-19 Impact factor: 4.506
Authors: Laura L Boles Ponto; Susan Walsh; Jiangeng Huang; Christine Mundt; Katherine Thede-Reynolds; G Leonard Watkins; John Sunderland; Michael Acevedo; Maureen Donovan Journal: AAPS J Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 4.009
Authors: Robert H Press; Hui-Kuo G Shu; Hyunsuk Shim; James M Mountz; Brenda F Kurland; Richard L Wahl; Ella F Jones; Nola M Hylton; Elizabeth R Gerstner; Robert J Nordstrom; Lori Henderson; Karen A Kurdziel; Bhadrasain Vikram; Michael A Jacobs; Matthias Holdhoff; Edward Taylor; David A Jaffray; Lawrence H Schwartz; David A Mankoff; Paul E Kinahan; Hannah M Linden; Philippe Lambin; Thomas J Dilling; Daniel L Rubin; Lubomir Hadjiiski; John M Buatti Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2018-06-30 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Samantha Warren; Christopher N Hurt; Thomas Crosby; Mike Partridge; Maria A Hawkins Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-07-29 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: H van Meir; R A Nout; M J P Welters; N M Loof; M L de Kam; J J van Ham; S Samuels; G G Kenter; A F Cohen; C J M Melief; J Burggraaf; M I E van Poelgeest; S H van der Burg Journal: Oncoimmunology Date: 2016-12-23 Impact factor: 8.110
Authors: Łukasz Kuncman; Konrad Stawiski; Michał Masłowski; Jakub Kucharz; Jacek Fijuth Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2020-07-03 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Joshua A Rowe; Federica Morandi; Dustin R Osborne; Jonathan S Wall; Stephen J Kennel; Robert B Reed; Amy K LeBlanc Journal: Anat Histol Embryol Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 1.114
Authors: T Kumar; A Schernberg; F Busato; M Laurans; I Fumagalli; I Dumas; E Deutsch; C Haie-Meder; C Chargari Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2019-07-08 Impact factor: 3.989