OBJECTIVE: The effect of functional lung avoidance planning on radiation dose-dependent changes in regional lung perfusion is unknown. We characterized dose-perfusion response on longitudinal perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/CT in two cohorts of lung cancer patients treated with and without functional lung avoidance techniques. METHODS: The study included 28 primary lung cancer patients: 20 from interventional (NCT02773238) (FLARE-RT) and eight from observational (NCT01982123) (LUNG-RT) clinical trials. FLARE-RT treatment plans included perfused lung dose constraints while LUNG-RT plans adhered to clinical standards. Pre- and 3 month post-treatment macro-aggregated albumin (MAA) SPECT/CT scans were rigidly co-registered to planning four-dimensional CT scans. Tumour-subtracted lung dose was converted to EQD2 and sorted into 5 Gy bins. Mean dose and percent change between pre/post-RT MAA-SPECT uptake (%ΔPERF), normalized to total tumour-subtracted lung uptake, were calculated in each binned dose region. Perfusion frequency histograms of pre/post-RT MAA-SPECT were analyzed. Dose-response data were parameterized by sigmoid logistic functions to estimate maximum perfusion increase (%ΔPERFmaxincrease), maximum perfusion decrease (%ΔPERFmaxdecrease), dose midpoint (Dmid), and dose-response slope (k). RESULTS: Differences in MAA perfusion frequency distribution shape between time points were observed in 11/20 (55%) FLARE-RT and 2/8 (25%) LUNG-RT patients (p < 0.05). FLARE-RT dose response was characterized by >10% perfusion increase in the 0-5 Gy dose bin for 8/20 patients (%ΔPERFmaxincrease = 10-40%), which was not observed in any LUNG-RT patients (p = 0.03). The dose midpoint Dmid at which relative perfusion declined by 50% trended higher in FLARE-RT compared to LUNG-RT cohorts (35 GyEQD2 vs 21 GyEQD2, p = 0.09), while the dose-response slope k was similar between FLARE-RT and LUNG-RT cohorts (3.1-3.2, p = 0.86). CONCLUSION: Functional lung avoidance planning may promote increased post-treatment perfusion in low dose regions for select patients, though inter-patient variability remains high in unbalanced cohorts. These preliminary findings form testable hypotheses that warrant subsequent validation in larger cohorts within randomized or case-matched control investigations. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This novel preliminary study reports differences in dose-response relationships between patients receiving functional lung avoidance radiation therapy (FLARE-RT) and those receiving conventionally planned radiation therapy (LUNG-RT). Following further validation and testing of these effects in larger patient populations, individualized estimation of regional lung perfusion dose-response may help refine future risk-adaptive strategies to minimize lung function deficits and toxicity incidence.
OBJECTIVE: The effect of functional lung avoidance planning on radiation dose-dependent changes in regional lung perfusion is unknown. We characterized dose-perfusion response on longitudinal perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/CT in two cohorts of lung cancer patients treated with and without functional lung avoidance techniques. METHODS: The study included 28 primary lung cancer patients: 20 from interventional (NCT02773238) (FLARE-RT) and eight from observational (NCT01982123) (LUNG-RT) clinical trials. FLARE-RT treatment plans included perfused lung dose constraints while LUNG-RT plans adhered to clinical standards. Pre- and 3 month post-treatment macro-aggregated albumin (MAA) SPECT/CT scans were rigidly co-registered to planning four-dimensional CT scans. Tumour-subtracted lung dose was converted to EQD2 and sorted into 5 Gy bins. Mean dose and percent change between pre/post-RT MAA-SPECT uptake (%ΔPERF), normalized to total tumour-subtracted lung uptake, were calculated in each binned dose region. Perfusion frequency histograms of pre/post-RT MAA-SPECT were analyzed. Dose-response data were parameterized by sigmoid logistic functions to estimate maximum perfusion increase (%ΔPERFmaxincrease), maximum perfusion decrease (%ΔPERFmaxdecrease), dose midpoint (Dmid), and dose-response slope (k). RESULTS: Differences in MAA perfusion frequency distribution shape between time points were observed in 11/20 (55%) FLARE-RT and 2/8 (25%) LUNG-RT patients (p < 0.05). FLARE-RT dose response was characterized by >10% perfusion increase in the 0-5 Gy dose bin for 8/20 patients (%ΔPERFmaxincrease = 10-40%), which was not observed in any LUNG-RT patients (p = 0.03). The dose midpoint Dmid at which relative perfusion declined by 50% trended higher in FLARE-RT compared to LUNG-RT cohorts (35 GyEQD2 vs 21 GyEQD2, p = 0.09), while the dose-response slope k was similar between FLARE-RT and LUNG-RT cohorts (3.1-3.2, p = 0.86). CONCLUSION: Functional lung avoidance planning may promote increased post-treatment perfusion in low dose regions for select patients, though inter-patient variability remains high in unbalanced cohorts. These preliminary findings form testable hypotheses that warrant subsequent validation in larger cohorts within randomized or case-matched control investigations. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This novel preliminary study reports differences in dose-response relationships between patients receiving functional lung avoidance radiation therapy (FLARE-RT) and those receiving conventionally planned radiation therapy (LUNG-RT). Following further validation and testing of these effects in larger patient populations, individualized estimation of regional lung perfusion dose-response may help refine future risk-adaptive strategies to minimize lung function deficits and toxicity incidence.
Authors: Judith A Christian; Mike Partridge; Elena Nioutsikou; Gary Cook; Helen A McNair; Bernadette Cronin; Frederic Courbon; James L Bedford; Michael Brada Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2005-11-07 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: Katherina P Farr; Ditte S Møller; Azza A Khalil; Stine Kramer; Anni Morsing; Cai Grau Journal: Acta Oncol Date: 2015-07-23 Impact factor: 4.089
Authors: Daniel F Polan; Mary Feng; Theodore S Lawrence; Randall K Ten Haken; Kristy K Brock Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-06-27 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: S J Ament; S Maus; H Reber; H G Buchholz; N Bausbacher; C Brochhausen; F Graf; M Miederer; M Schreckenberger Journal: Recent Results Cancer Res Date: 2013
Authors: Ramesh Gopal; Susan L Tucker; Ritsuko Komaki; Zhongxing Liao; Kenneth M Forster; Craig Stevens; Jason F Kelly; George Starkschall Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2003-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Yvette Seppenwoolde; Katrien De Jaeger; Liesbeth J Boersma; José S A Belderbos; Joos V Lebesque Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-11-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Antonia E Wuschner; Mattison J Flakus; Eric M Wallat; Joseph M Reinhardt; Dhanansayan Shanmuganayagam; Gary E Christensen; John E Bayouth Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-07-30
Authors: Kevin P Horn; Hannah M T Thomas; Hubert J Vesselle; Paul E Kinahan; Robert S Miyaoka; Ramesh Rengan; Jing Zeng; Stephen R Bowen Journal: Clin Nucl Med Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 10.782