Evaluation of two dose-volume histogram reduction models for the prediction of radiation pneumonitis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the similarities between the mean lung dose and two dose-volume histogram (DVH) reduction techniques of 3D dose distributions of the lung. PATIENTS AND METHODS: DVHs of the lungs were calculated from 3D dose distributions of patients treated for malignant lymphoma (44), breast cancer (42) and lung cancer (20). With a DVH reduction technique, a DVH is summarized by the equivalent uniform dose (EUD), a quantity which is directly related to the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). Two DVH reduction techniques were used. The first was based on an empirical model proposed by Kutcher et al. (Kutcher, G.J., Burman, C., Brewster, M.S., Goitein, M. and Mohan, R. Histogram reduction method for calculating complication probabilities for three-dimensional treatment planning evaluations. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 21: 137-146, 1991), which needs a volume exponent n. Several values for n were tested. The second technique was based on a radiobiological model, the parallel functional subunit model developed by Niemierko et al. (Niemierko, A. and Goitein, M. Modeling of normal tissue response to radiation: the critical volume model. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 25: 135-145, 1993) and Jackson et al. (Jackson, A., Kutcher, G.J. and Yorke, E.D. Probability of radiation-induced complications for normal tissues with parallel architecture subject to non-uniform irradiation. Med. Phys. 20: 613-625, 1993), for which a local dose-effect relation needed to be specified. This relation was obtained from an analysis of perfusion and ventilation SPECT data.
RESULTS: It can be shown analytically that the two DVH reduction techniques are identical, if the local dose-effect relation obeys a power-law relationship in the clinical dose range. Local dose-effect relations based on perfusion and ventilation SPECT data can indeed be fitted with a power-law relationship in the range 0-80 Gy, from which values of n = 0.8-0.9 were deduced. These correspond to the commonly used value of n = 0.87 for lung tissue and yielded EUDn=0.87 values which were almost identical to the mean lung doses. For other n values, for which no experimental data are present, differences exist between EUD and mean dose values. Six patients with malignant lymphoma (6/44) and none of the breast cancer patients (0/42) developed radiation pneumonitis. These cases occurred only at high values for the mean lung dose.
CONCLUSION: The two DVH reduction techniques are identical for lung and are very similar to mean dose calculations. The two techniques are also relatively similar for other model parameter values.