Nuzhat Jan1, Christopher Guy1, Leonid B Reshko1, Geoffrey D Hugo1, Elisabeth Weiss2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia. Electronic address: elisabeth.weiss@vcuhealth.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the hypothesis that positional and anatomic variations during radiation therapy induce changes in lung and heart volumes and associated radiation doses. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this longitudinal investigation, variations in lung and heart volumes and standard dose parameters of mean lung dose, lung V20Gy, mean heart dose, and heart V40Gy were analyzed on weekly 4-dimensional CT scans of 15 lung cancer patients during conventionally fractionated radiochemotherapy. Tumor, individual lung lobes, and heart were delineated on the mid-ventilation phase of weekly 4-dimensional CT scans. Lung lobes and heart were also contoured on individual breathing phases of pre-, mid-, and end-of-treatment scans. Planning dose was transferred to consecutive scans via rigid registration. Volume and dose variations were assessed relative to the initial planning scan. RESULTS: Interfraction lung volume variability relative to week 0 was twice as large as tidal volume variability (8.0% ± 5.3% vs 4.0% ± 3.3%, P=.003). Interfraction lung volume variation ranged between 0.8% and 17.1% for individual patient means. Lower lung lobes had larger volume variability compared with upper lobes (13.5% ± 8.1% vs 7.0% ± 5.0%, P<.00001). Average mean lung dose variation was 0.5 Gy (range, 0.2-1.0 Gy for individual patient means) and average lung V20Gy variation 0.9% (range, 0.2%-1.6%). Average heart volume variation was 7.2% (range, 3.4%-12.6%). Average mean heart dose variation was 1.2 Gy (range, 0.1-3.0 Gy) and average heart V40Gy variation 1.4% (range, 0%-4.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic and positional variations during radiation therapy induce changes in radiation doses to lung and heart. Repeated lung and heart dose assessment will provide a better estimate of the actual delivered dose and will improve prediction models for normal tissue toxicity, if assessed in larger cohorts.
PURPOSE: To investigate the hypothesis that positional and anatomic variations during radiation therapy induce changes in lung and heart volumes and associated radiation doses. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this longitudinal investigation, variations in lung and heart volumes and standard dose parameters of mean lung dose, lung V20Gy, mean heart dose, and heart V40Gy were analyzed on weekly 4-dimensional CT scans of 15 lung cancerpatients during conventionally fractionated radiochemotherapy. Tumor, individual lung lobes, and heart were delineated on the mid-ventilation phase of weekly 4-dimensional CT scans. Lung lobes and heart were also contoured on individual breathing phases of pre-, mid-, and end-of-treatment scans. Planning dose was transferred to consecutive scans via rigid registration. Volume and dose variations were assessed relative to the initial planning scan. RESULTS: Interfraction lung volume variability relative to week 0 was twice as large as tidal volume variability (8.0% ± 5.3% vs 4.0% ± 3.3%, P=.003). Interfraction lung volume variation ranged between 0.8% and 17.1% for individual patient means. Lower lung lobes had larger volume variability compared with upper lobes (13.5% ± 8.1% vs 7.0% ± 5.0%, P<.00001). Average mean lung dose variation was 0.5 Gy (range, 0.2-1.0 Gy for individual patient means) and average lung V20Gy variation 0.9% (range, 0.2%-1.6%). Average heart volume variation was 7.2% (range, 3.4%-12.6%). Average mean heart dose variation was 1.2 Gy (range, 0.1-3.0 Gy) and average heart V40Gy variation 1.4% (range, 0%-4.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic and positional variations during radiation therapy induce changes in radiation doses to lung and heart. Repeated lung and heart dose assessment will provide a better estimate of the actual delivered dose and will improve prediction models for normal tissue toxicity, if assessed in larger cohorts.
Authors: Lawrence B Marks; Soren M Bentzen; Joseph O Deasy; Feng-Ming Spring Kong; Jeffrey D Bradley; Ivan S Vogelius; Issam El Naqa; Jessica L Hubbs; Joos V Lebesque; Robert D Timmerman; Mary K Martel; Andrew Jackson Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Ellen D Yorke; Andrew Jackson; Kenneth E Rosenzweig; Scott A Merrick; Dorota Gabrys; Ennapadam S Venkatraman; Chandra M Burman; Steven A Leibel; C Clifton Ling Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-10-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Nadia Haj Mohammad; Martijn Kamphuis; Maarten C C M Hulshof; Lotte J Lutkenhaus; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Jacques J G H M Bergman; H A C M Rianne de Bruin-Bon; Elisabeth D Geijsen; Arjan Bel; S Mathijs Boekholdt; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2015-01-24 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: David A Palma; Suresh Senan; Kayoko Tsujino; Robert B Barriger; Ramesh Rengan; Marta Moreno; Jeffrey D Bradley; Tae Hyun Kim; Sara Ramella; Lawrence B Marks; Luigi De Petris; Larry Stitt; George Rodrigues Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-06-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: An Qin; David Gersten; Jian Liang; Qiang Liu; Inga Grill; Thomas Guerrero; Craig Stevens; Di Yan Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2018-10-10 Impact factor: 2.102