Kimberly P Raghubar1, Michael Lamba2, Kim M Cecil3, Keith Owen Yeates4, E Mark Mahone5, Christina Limke6, David Grosshans7, Travis J Beckwith3, M Douglas Ris1. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine and Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, Texas. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio. 3. Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, and the Imaging Research Center, Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio. 4. Department of Psychology, Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute and Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 5. Department of Neuropsychology and Department of Psychiatry, Kennedy Krieger Institute and Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 6. Helen DeVos, Children's Hospital, Grand Rapids, Michigan. 7. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Advances in radiation treatment (RT), specifically volumetric planning with detailed dose and volumetric data for specific brain structures, have provided new opportunities to study neurobehavioral outcomes of RT in children treated for brain tumor. The present study examined the relationship between biophysical and physical dose metrics and neurocognitive ability, namely learning and memory, 2 years post-RT in pediatric brain tumor patients. PROCEDURE: The sample consisted of 26 pediatric patients with brain tumor, 14 of whom completed neuropsychological evaluations on average 24 months post-RT. Prescribed dose and dose-volume metrics for specific brain regions were calculated including physical metrics (i.e., mean dose and maximum dose) and biophysical metrics (i.e., integral biological effective dose and generalized equivalent uniform dose). We examined the associations between dose-volume metrics (whole brain, right and left hippocampus), and performance on measures of learning and memory (Children's Memory Scale). RESULTS: Biophysical dose metrics were highly correlated with the physical metric of mean dose but not with prescribed dose. Biophysical metrics and mean dose, but not prescribed dose, correlated with measures of learning and memory. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings call into question the value of prescribed dose for characterizing treatment intensity; they also suggest that biophysical dose has only a limited advantage compared to physical dose when calculated for specific regions of the brain. We discuss the implications of the findings for evaluating and understanding the relation between RT and neurocognitive functioning.
BACKGROUND:Advances in radiation treatment (RT), specifically volumetric planning with detailed dose and volumetric data for specific brain structures, have provided new opportunities to study neurobehavioral outcomes of RT in children treated for brain tumor. The present study examined the relationship between biophysical and physical dose metrics and neurocognitive ability, namely learning and memory, 2 years post-RT in pediatric brain tumorpatients. PROCEDURE: The sample consisted of 26 pediatric patients with brain tumor, 14 of whom completed neuropsychological evaluations on average 24 months post-RT. Prescribed dose and dose-volume metrics for specific brain regions were calculated including physical metrics (i.e., mean dose and maximum dose) and biophysical metrics (i.e., integral biological effective dose and generalized equivalent uniform dose). We examined the associations between dose-volume metrics (whole brain, right and left hippocampus), and performance on measures of learning and memory (Children's Memory Scale). RESULTS: Biophysical dose metrics were highly correlated with the physical metric of mean dose but not with prescribed dose. Biophysical metrics and mean dose, but not prescribed dose, correlated with measures of learning and memory. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings call into question the value of prescribed dose for characterizing treatment intensity; they also suggest that biophysical dose has only a limited advantage compared to physical dose when calculated for specific regions of the brain. We discuss the implications of the findings for evaluating and understanding the relation between RT and neurocognitive functioning.
Authors: Thomas E Merchant; Erin N Kiehna; Chenghong Li; Xiaoping Xiong; Raymond K Mulhern Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-08-22 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Tricia Z King; Eileen B Fennell; Lorna Williams; James Algina; Stephen Boggs; Bruce Crosson; Christiana Leonard Journal: Child Neuropsychol Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 2.500
Authors: R K Mulhern; S L Palmer; W E Reddick; J O Glass; L E Kun; J Taylor; J Langston; A Gajjar Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-01-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kristen E Robinson; Kelly R Wolfe; Keith O Yeates; E Mark Mahone; Kim M Cecil; M Douglas Ris Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2014-11-14 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Pamela Moses; Katherine Roe; Richard B Buxton; Eric C Wong; Lawrence R Frank; Joan Stiles Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Iska Moxon-Emre; Eric Bouffet; Michael D Taylor; Normand Laperriere; Nadia Scantlebury; Nicole Law; Brenda J Spiegler; David Malkin; Laura Janzen; Donald Mabbott Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-02-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Katja Margelisch; Martina Studer; Barbara Catherine Ritter; Maja Steinlin; Kurt Leibundgut; Theda Heinks Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2015-06-05 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Kimberly P Raghubar; Jessica Orobio; M Douglas Ris; Andrew M Heitzer; Alexandra Roth; Austin L Brown; M Fatih Okcu; Murali Chintagumpala; David R Grosshans; Arnold C Paulino; Anita Mahajan; Lisa S Kahalley Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2019-05-27 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Lisa S Kahalley; M Douglas Ris; Anita Mahajan; M Fatih Okcu; Murali Chintagumpala; Arnold C Paulino; William E Whitehead; Charles G Minard; Heather H Stancel; Jessica Orobio; Judy J Xue; Emily A Warren; David R Grosshans Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2019-06-10 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Derek S Tsang; Laurence Kim; Zhihui Amy Liu; Laura Janzen; Mohammad Khandwala; Eric Bouffet; Normand Laperriere; Hitesh Dama; Dana Keilty; Tim Craig; Vijay Ramaswamy; David C Hodgson; Donald Mabbott Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2021-03-25 Impact factor: 12.300