| Literature DB >> 34372887 |
Whitney Sumner1, Sangwoo S Kim2, Lucas Vitzthum1, Kevin Moore1, Todd Atwood1, James Murphy1,3, Sayuri Miyauchi1, Joseph A Califano1,3,4, Loren K Mell1,3, Arno J Mundt1,3, Andrew B Sharabi5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Image guidance in radiation oncology has resulted in significant improvements in the accuracy and precision of radiation therapy (RT). Recently, the resolution and quality of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for image guidance has increased so that tumor masses and lymph nodes are readily detectable and measurable. During treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), on-board CBCT setup imaging is routinely obtained; however, this CBCT imaging data is not utilized to predict patient outcomes. Here, we analyzed whether changes in CBCT measurements obtained during a course of radiation therapy correlate with responses on routine 3-month follow-up diagnostic imaging and overall survival (OS). MATERIALS/Entities:
Keywords: CBCT; Cone beam CT; Head and neck cancer; Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma; Radiation; Radiotherapy
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34372887 PMCID: PMC8351145 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01871-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiat Oncol ISSN: 1748-717X Impact factor: 3.481
Fig. 1Lymph node response assessment via Cone Beam CT (CBCT) daily setup imaging versus diagnostic CT. A Representative patient images demonstrating CC, ML and AP measurements at CT simulation (upper panel) and End of Treatment CBCT (lower panel). B Representative patient images demonstrating Complete Response (upper), Partial Response (middle) and Stable Disease (lower) with CC measurements taken at Pre-Treatment CT simulation, End of Treatment CBCT and 3 month post-RT
Patient characteristics
| N = 64 (%) | |
|---|---|
| Age | |
| ≤ 60 | 34 (53.1) |
| > 60 | 30 (46.9) |
| Gender | |
| Male | 55 (85.9) |
| Female | 9 (14.1) |
| Smoking | |
| < 10 pk yrs | 34 (53.1) |
| ≥ 10 pk yrs | 30 (46.9) |
| T stage | |
| 1 | 17 (26.6) |
| 2 | 22 (34.3) |
| 3 | 12 (18.8) |
| 4 | 13 (20.3) |
| N stage | |
| 1 | 33 (51.6) |
| 2 | 30 (46.9) |
| 3 | 1 (1.6) |
| Overall stage | |
| I | 25 (39.1) |
| II | 17 (26.6) |
| III | 16 (25.0) |
| IV | 5 (7.8) |
| P16 status | |
| Positive | 58 (90.1) |
| Negative | 6 (9.4) |
| Concurrent chemotherapy | |
| Yes | 57 (89.1) |
| No | 7 (10.1) |
| Subsite | |
| BoT | 30 (46.9) |
| Tonsil | 29 (45.3) |
| Soft palate | 3 (4.7) |
| Pharyngeal wall | 2 (3.2) |
Patient characteristics by treatment response
| Complete responders, n = 40 (62.5%) | Non-complete responders, n = 24 (37.5%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | |||
| ≤ 60 | 24 (60.0) | 10 (41.7) | |
| > 60 | 16 (40.0) | 14 (58.3) | p = 0.21 |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 34 (85.0) | 21 (87.5) | |
| Female | 6 (15.0) | 3 (12.5) | p = 0.32 |
| Smoking | |||
| < 10 pk yrs | 20 (50.0) | 14 (58.3) | |
| ≥ 10 pk yrs | 20 (50.0) | 10 (41.7) | p = 0.21 |
| T stage | |||
| 1 | 9 (22.5) | 8 (33.3) | |
| 2 | 16 (40.0) | 6 (25.0) | |
| 3 | 8 (20.0) | 4 (16.7) | |
| 4 | 7 (17.5) | 6 (25.0) | p = 0.32 |
| N stage | |||
| 1 | 23 (57.5) | 10 (41.7) | |
| 2 | 17 (42.5) | 13 (54.2) | |
| 3 | 0 (0.0) | 1 (4.2) | p = 0.44 |
| Overall stage | |||
| I | 16 (40.0) | 9 (37.5) | |
| II | 14 (35.0) | 3 (12.5) | |
| III | 8 (20.0) | 8 (33.3) | |
| IV | 2 (5.0) | 3 (12.5) | p = 0.19 |
| P16 status | |||
| Positive | 36 (90.0) | 22 (91.7) | |
| Negative | 4 (10.0) | 2 (8.3) | p = 0.92 |
| Concurrent chemotherapy | |||
| Yes | 36 (90.0) | 21 (87.5) | |
| No | 4 (10.0) | 3 (12.5) | p = 0.16 |
| Subsite | |||
| BoT | 14 (35.0) | 16 (66.7) | |
| Tonsil | 22 (55.0) | 7 (29.2) | |
| Soft palate | 3 (7.5) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Pharyngeal wall | 1 (2.5) | 1 (4.2) | p = 0.31 |
Distribution of relevant patient characteristics between responders and non-responders with corresponding chi-square test
Intra-treatment change in nodal size by treatment response
| Complete responders | Non-complete responders | |
|---|---|---|
| CC percent change from CT Sim to EOT CBCT | ||
| Median | 28.8% | 7.7% |
| Range | 2.5–75.3 | 0.4–44.4 |
| 2D percent change from CT Sim to EOT CBCT | ||
| Median | 56.9% | 38.2% |
| Range | 1.8–82.9 | 7.6–73.8 |
| Volumetric percent change from CT Sim to EOT CBCT | ||
| Median | 65.3% | 48.8% |
| Range | 10.9–95.6 | 9.8–70.0 |
Percent change in craniocaudal (CC), two-dimensional (2D) and volumetric size of largest nodal deposit as measured from the time of CT simulation (CT Sim) to the end-of-treatment cone beam CT scan (EOT) reported as median and range for responders and non-responders
Fig. 2Change in size of lymph nodes at End of Radiation Treatment correlates with objective responses at 3 months. A Logistic regression showing the probability of response on 3-month post treatment imaging based on percent change of CC measurement from CT Sim to EOT CBCT. B Scatter plot demonstrating differential percent residual disease between complete responders versus patients with partial responses or stable disease. C Histogram demonstrating differential frequency of patients with 100% decrease at end of treatment between PR/SD versus CR. Patients were binned by each 10% change and stratified by CR compared to PR and SD
Fig. 3Reduced lymph node size at end of radiation treatment correlates with overall survival. A Unadjusted Kaplan–Meier curve demonstrating overall survival for patients who experienced > 30% (red) and ≤ 30% reduction (blue) in the CC measurement from CT simulation to EOT CBCT (Binary Chi-Square HR 4.85, p = 0.028; continuous variable HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02–1.15, p = 0.045). Patients with a > 30% decrease in lymph node size at end of treatment demonstrated improved overall survival. B Unadjusted Kaplan–Meier curve demonstrating overall survival for patients who experienced a CR (blue) and less than CR (PR, SD) (red) on 3-month post-treatment imaging