PURPOSE: We investigate whether esophageal dose-length parameters (Ldose) can robustly predict significant weight loss-≥5% weight loss during radiation therapy (RT) compared with the weight before RT-in patients with lung cancer treated with definitive intent. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with lung cancer treated with conventionally fractionated RT between 2010 and 2018 were retrospectively identified. LFdose and LPdose, the length of full- and partial-circumferential esophagus receiving greater than a threshold dose in Gy, respectively, were created. Multivariate logistic regression examined the associations between individual Ldose and weight loss after adjusting for clinical parameters and correcting for multiple comparisons. Ridge logistic regression examined the relative importance of Ldose compared with dose-volume (Vdose), mean dose (Dmean), and clinical parameters in determining weight loss. Univariate logistic regression examined the unadjusted probability of weight loss for important Ldose parameters. RESULTS: Among the 214 patients identified, median age was 66.9 years (range, 31.5-88.9 years), 50.5% (n = 108) were male, 68.2% (n = 146) had stage III lung cancer, median RT dose was 63 Gy (range, 60-66 Gy), and 88.3% (n = 189) received concurrent chemotherapy. Esophagus lengths receiving high full-circumferential (LF50-LF60) and high partial-circumferential doses (LP60) were associated with significant weight loss (P ≤ .05). LF65 and LP65 reached near significance (P = .06 and .053, respectively). LF65 > LF60 > LP65 were the most important dose parameters in determining weight loss compared with other Ldose, Vdose, and Dmean parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal Ldose parameters are an efficient way of interpreting complex dose parameters in relation to weight loss toxicity among patients with lung cancer receiving definitive RT.
PURPOSE: We investigate whether esophageal dose-length parameters (Ldose) can robustly predict significant weight loss-≥5% weight loss during radiation therapy (RT) compared with the weight before RT-in patients with lung cancer treated with definitive intent. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with lung cancer treated with conventionally fractionated RT between 2010 and 2018 were retrospectively identified. LFdose and LPdose, the length of full- and partial-circumferential esophagus receiving greater than a threshold dose in Gy, respectively, were created. Multivariate logistic regression examined the associations between individual Ldose and weight loss after adjusting for clinical parameters and correcting for multiple comparisons. Ridge logistic regression examined the relative importance of Ldose compared with dose-volume (Vdose), mean dose (Dmean), and clinical parameters in determining weight loss. Univariate logistic regression examined the unadjusted probability of weight loss for important Ldose parameters. RESULTS: Among the 214 patients identified, median age was 66.9 years (range, 31.5-88.9 years), 50.5% (n = 108) were male, 68.2% (n = 146) had stage III lung cancer, median RT dose was 63 Gy (range, 60-66 Gy), and 88.3% (n = 189) received concurrent chemotherapy. Esophagus lengths receiving high full-circumferential (LF50-LF60) and high partial-circumferential doses (LP60) were associated with significant weight loss (P ≤ .05). LF65 and LP65 reached near significance (P = .06 and .053, respectively). LF65 > LF60 > LP65 were the most important dose parameters in determining weight loss compared with other Ldose, Vdose, and Dmean parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal Ldose parameters are an efficient way of interpreting complex dose parameters in relation to weight loss toxicity among patients with lung cancer receiving definitive RT.
Authors: Jeffrey D Bradley; Rebecca Paulus; Ritsuko Komaki; Gregory Masters; George Blumenschein; Steven Schild; Jeffrey Bogart; Chen Hu; Kenneth Forster; Anthony Magliocco; Vivek Kavadi; Yolanda I Garces; Samir Narayan; Puneeth Iyengar; Cliff Robinson; Raymond B Wynn; Christopher Koprowski; Joanne Meng; Jonathan Beitler; Rakesh Gaur; Walter Curran; Hak Choy Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2015-01-16 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Julian G Rosenman; Jan S Halle; Mark A Socinski; Katharin Deschesne; Dominic T Moore; Harold Johnson; Robert Fraser; David E Morris Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-10-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Steven M Grunberg; Robert R Deuson; Panagiotis Mavros; Olga Geling; Mogens Hansen; Giorgio Cruciani; Bruno Daniele; Gerard De Pouvourville; Edward B Rubenstein; Gedske Daugaard Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-05-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Karin J C Sanders; Lizza E Hendriks; Esther G C Troost; Gerben P Bootsma; Ruud M A Houben; Annemie M W J Schols; Anne-Marie C Dingemans Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2016-03-03 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: David A Palma; Suresh Senan; Cary Oberije; Jose Belderbos; Núria Rodríguez de Dios; Jeffrey D Bradley; R Bryan Barriger; Marta Moreno-Jiménez; Tae Hyun Kim; Sara Ramella; Sarah Everitt; Ramesh Rengan; Lawrence B Marks; Kim De Ruyck; Andrew Warner; George Rodrigues Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2013-09-10 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Anna Merlotti; Alessio Bruni; Paolo Borghetti; Sara Ramella; Vieri Scotti; Marco Trovò; Rita Chiari; Frank Lohr; Umberto Ricardi; Emilio Bria; Giovanni L Pappagallo; Rolando M D'Angelillo; Stefano Arcangeli Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2021-05-05 Impact factor: 3.469