1
|
Bai H, Wang XF, Xu YH, Zaorsky NG, Wang HH, Niu GM, Li JC, Dong Y, Li JY, Yu L, Chen MF, Lu XT, Yuan ZY, Yang JL, Meng MB. Brachial plexopathy following stereotactic body radiation therapy in apical lung malignancies: A dosimetric pooled analysis of individual patient data. Radiother Oncol 2024; 200:110529. [PMID: 39255923 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110529] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/29/2024] [Revised: 09/01/2024] [Accepted: 09/06/2024] [Indexed: 09/12/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES The aim of this study is to establish dosimetric constraints for the brachial plexus at risk of developing grade ≥ 2 brachial plexopathy in the context of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). PATIENTS AND METHODS Individual patient data from 349 patients with 356 apical lung malignancies who underwent SBRT were extracted from 5 articles. The anatomical brachial plexus was delineated following the guidelines provided in the atlases developed by Hall, et al. and Kong, et al.. Patient characteristics, pertinent SBRT dosimetric parameters, and brachial plexopathy grades (according to CTCAE 4.0 or 5.0) were obtained. Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models were used to estimate the risk of developing grade ≥ 2 brachial plexopathy through maximum likelihood parameter fitting. RESULTS The prescription dose/fractionation schedules for SBRT ranged from 27 to 60 Gy in 1 to 8 fractions. During a follow-up period spanning from 6 to 113 months, 22 patients (6.3 %) developed grade ≥2 brachial plexopathy (4.3 % grade 2, 2.0 % grade 3); the median time to symptoms onset after SBRT was 8 months (ranged, 3-54 months). NTCP models estimated a 10 % risk of grade ≥2 brachial plexopathy with an anatomic brachial plexus maximum dose (Dmax) of 20.7 Gy, 34.2 Gy, and 42.7 Gy in one, three, and five fractions, respectively. Similarly, the NTCP model estimates the risks of grade ≥2 brachial plexopathy as 10 % for BED Dmax at 192.3 Gy and EQD2 Dmax at 115.4 Gy with an α/β ratio of 3, respectively. Symptom persisted after treatment in nearly half of patients diagnosed with grade ≥2 brachial plexopathy (11/22, 50 %). CONCLUSIONS This study establishes dosimetric constraints ranging from 20.7 to 42.7 Gy across 1-5 fractions, aimed at mitigating the risk of developing grade ≥2 brachial plexopathy following SBRT. These findings provide valuable guidance for future ablative SBRT in apical lung malignancies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hui Bai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China
| | - Xiao-Feng Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China
| | - Yi-Han Xu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China
| | - Nicholas G Zaorsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Huan-Huan Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China
| | - Geng-Min Niu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China
| | - Jia-Cheng Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China
| | - Yang Dong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China
| | - Jun-Yi Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China
| | - Lu Yu
- Department of Radiology, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China
| | - Mei-Feng Chen
- Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Clinical Medical College and The First Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, Chengdu 610500, PR China
| | - Xiao-Tong Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Affiliated Cancer Hospital & Institute of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510095, PR China
| | - Zhi-Yong Yuan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China
| | - Ji-Long Yang
- Department of Bone and Soft Tissue Tumor, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China
| | - Mao-Bin Meng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, PR China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Shekouhi R, Gerhold C, Chim H. The role of surgery in the management of radiation-induced brachial plexopathy: a systematic review. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2024; 49:490-498. [PMID: 37684017 DOI: 10.1177/17531934231197794] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/10/2023]
Abstract
This systematic literature review of the clinical characteristics of radiation-induced brachial plexopathy and outcomes after intervention includes 30 trials with 611 patients. The mean radiation dose to the brachial plexus was 56 Gy, and the mean duration of radiation was 4 weeks. The mean time from radiation to the onset of symptoms was 35 months. The most commonly reported symptom was sensory loss (n = 323, 62%), followed by motor deficits (n = 294, 56%) and neuropathic pain (n = 284, 54%). In total, 65 (56%) patients had panplexus involvement and 51 (44%) patients had partial plexus involvement. The most common surgical procedure was neurolysis with flap coverage (n = 108, 6%), followed by neurolysis alone (n = 71, 30%). Of the 237 patients who underwent surgery, 125 (53%) reported an improvement in pain. Motor and sensory deficits were improved in 46 (19%) and 39 (16%) patients, respectively, suggesting that surgery is beneficial in relieving pain, but not as beneficial in restoring motor and sensory function.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ramin Shekouhi
- Division of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Cameron Gerhold
- College of Medicine, Florida State University College of Medicine, Tallahassee, FL, USA
| | - Harvey Chim
- Division of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
- Lilian S. Wells Department of Neurosurgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Milano MT, Mavroidis P, Yorke E, Ryckman J, Kong FMS, Grimm J, Marks LB. In Reply to Onjukka et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:1145-1146. [PMID: 38401970 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.08.067] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2023] [Accepted: 08/29/2023] [Indexed: 02/26/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Michael T Milano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York
| | - Panayiotis Mavroidis
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Lineberger Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Ellen Yorke
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Jeff Ryckman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, West Virginia University, Parkersburg, West Virginia
| | - Feng-Ming Spring Kong
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital/Li Ka Shing School of Medicine Shenzhen/Hong Kong, China
| | - Jimm Grimm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Wellstar Health System, Marietta, Georgia
| | - Lawrence B Marks
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Lineberger Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Milano MT, Doucette C, Mavroidis P, Yorke E, Ryckman J, Mahadevan A, Kapitanova I, Kong FMS, Grimm J, Marks LB. Hypofractionated Stereotactic Radiation Therapy Dosimetric Tolerances for the Inferior Aspect of the Brachial Plexus: A Systematic Review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:931-943. [PMID: 36682981 PMCID: PMC11325459 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.11.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2022] [Revised: 10/17/2022] [Accepted: 11/06/2022] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
We sought to systematically review and summarize dosimetric factors associated with radiation-induced brachial plexopathy (RIBP) after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) or hypofractionated image guided radiation therapy (HIGRT). From published studies identified from searches of PubMed and Embase databases, data quantifying risks of RIBP after 1- to 10-fraction SBRT/HIGRT were extracted and summarized. Published studies have reported <10% risks of RIBP with maximum doses (Dmax) to the inferior aspect of the brachial plexus of 32 Gy in 5 fractions and 25 Gy in 3 fractions. For 10-fraction HIGRT, risks of RIBP appear to be low with Dmax < 40 to 50 Gy. For a given dose value, greater risks are anticipated with point volume-based metrics (ie, D0.03-0.035cc: minimum dose to hottest 0.03-0.035 cc) versus Dmax. With SBRT/HIGRT, there were insufficient published data to predict risks of RIBP relative to brachial plexus dose-volume exposure. Minimizing maximum doses and possibly volume exposure of the brachial plexus can reduce risks of RIBP after SBRT/HIGRT. Further study is needed to better understand the effect of volume exposure on the brachial plexus and whether there are location-specific susceptibilities along or within the brachial plexus structure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael T Milano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
| | | | - Panayiotis Mavroidis
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Lineberger Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Ellen Yorke
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Jeff Ryckman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, West Virginia University, Parkersburg, West Virginia
| | - Anand Mahadevan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geisinger Cancer Institute, Danville, Pennsylvania
| | - Irina Kapitanova
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geisinger Cancer Institute, Danville, Pennsylvania
| | - Feng-Ming Spring Kong
- Department of Clinical Oncology, University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital/Li Ka Shing School of Medicine, Shenzhen/Hong Kong, China
| | - Jimm Grimm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geisinger Cancer Institute, Danville, Pennsylvania
| | - Lawrence B Marks
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Lineberger Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Niu GM, Gao MM, Wang XF, Dong Y, Zhang YF, Wang HH, Guan Y, Cheng ZY, Zhao SZ, Song YC, Tao Z, Zhao LJ, Meng MB, Spring Kong FM, Yuan ZY. Dosimetric analysis of brachial plexopathy after stereotactic body radiotherapy: Significance of organ delineation. Radiother Oncol 2024; 190:110023. [PMID: 37995850 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.110023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2023] [Revised: 11/13/2023] [Accepted: 11/15/2023] [Indexed: 11/25/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Examine the significance of contouring the brachial plexus (BP) for toxicity estimation and select metrics for predicting radiation-induced brachial plexopathy (RIBP) after stereotactic body radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients with planning target volume (PTV) ≤ 2 cm from the BP were eligible. The BP was contoured primarily according to the RTOG 1106 atlas, while subclavian-axillary veins (SAV) were contoured according to RTOG 0236. Apical PTVs were classified as anterior (PTV-A) or posterior (PTV-B) PTVs. Variables predicting grade 2 or higher RIBP (RIBP2) were selected through least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression and logistic regression. RESULTS Among 137 patients with 140 BPs (median follow-up, 32.1 months), 11 experienced RIBP2. For patients with RIBP2, the maximum physical dose to the BP (BP-Dmax) was 46.5 Gy (median; range, 35.7 to 60.7 Gy). Of these patients, 54.5 % (6/11) satisfied the RTOG limits when using SAV delineation; among them, 83.3 % (5/6) had PTV-B. For patients with PTV-B, the maximum physical dose to SAV (SAV-Dmax) was 11.2 Gy (median) lower than BP-Dmax. Maximum and 0.3 cc biologically effective doses to the BP based on the linear-quadratic-linear model (BP-BEDmax LQL and BP-BED0.3cc LQL, α/β = 3) were selected as predictive variables with thresholds of 118 and 73 Gy, respectively. CONCLUSION Contouring SAV may significantly underestimate the RIBP2 risk in dosimetry, especially for patients with PTV-B. BP contouring indicated BP-BED0.3cc LQL and BP-BEDmax LQL as potential predictors of RIBP2.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Geng-Min Niu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Miao-Miao Gao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Xiao-Feng Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Yang Dong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Yi-Fan Zhang
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Integrative Oncology, Tianjin Union Medical Center, Nankai University School of Medicine, Tianjin, China
| | - Huan-Huan Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Yong Guan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Ze-Yuan Cheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Shu-Zhou Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Yong-Chun Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Zhen Tao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Lu-Jun Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Mao-Bin Meng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China
| | - Feng-Ming Spring Kong
- Department of Clinical Oncology, HKU Shenzhen Hospital, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, the University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Hong Kong, China.
| | - Zhi-Yong Yuan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center, and Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Milano MT, Mavroidis P, Ryckman J, Yorke E, Doucette C, Mahadevan A, Kapitanova I, Spring Kong FM, Marks LB, Grimm J. Radiation-induced inferior brachial plexopathy after stereotactic body radiotherapy: Pooled analyses of risks. Radiother Oncol 2023; 182:109583. [PMID: 36842665 PMCID: PMC10501316 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109583] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2022] [Revised: 01/31/2023] [Accepted: 02/20/2023] [Indexed: 02/28/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Radiation-induced brachial plexopathy (RIBP), resulting in symptomatic motor or sensory deficits of the upper extremity, is a risk after exposure of the brachial plexus to therapeutic doses of radiation. We sought to model dosimetric factors associated with risks of RIBP after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). METHODS From a prior systematic review, 4 studies were identified that included individual patient data amenable to normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) modelling after SBRT for apical lung tumors. Two probit NTCP models were derived: one from 4 studies (including 221 patients with 229 targets and 18 events); and another from 3 studies (including 185 patients with 192 targets and 11 events) that similarly contoured the brachial plexus. RESULTS NTCP models suggest ≈10% risks associated with brachial plexus maximum dose (Dmax) of ∼32-34 Gy in 3 fractions and ∼40-43 Gy in 5 fractions. RIBP risks increase with increasing brachial plexus Dmax. Compared to previously published data from conventionally-fractionated or moderately-hypofractionated radiotherapy for breast, lung and head and neck cancers (which tend to utilize radiation fields that circumferentially irradiate the brachial plexus), SBRT (characterized by steep dose gradients outside of the target volume) exhibits a much less steep dose-response with brachial plexus Dmax > 90-100 Gy in 2-Gy equivalents. CONCLUSIONS A dose-response for risk of RIBP after SBRT is observed relative to brachial plexus Dmax. Comparisons to data from less conformal radiotherapy suggests potential dose-volume dependences of RIBP risks, though published data were not amenable to NTCP modelling of dose-volume measures associated with RIBP after SBRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael T Milano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester, 601 Elmwood Ave. Box 647, Rochester, NY, United States.
| | - Panayiotis Mavroidis
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Lineberger Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Jeff Ryckman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, West Virginia University, Parkersburg, WV, United States
| | - Ellen Yorke
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Christopher Doucette
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester, 601 Elmwood Ave. Box 647, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Anand Mahadevan
- Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center at NYU Langone Health, NY, United States
| | - Irina Kapitanova
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geisinger Cancer Institute, Danville, PA, United States
| | - Feng-Ming Spring Kong
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital/Li Ka Shing School of Medicine, Shenzhen, Hong Kong, China
| | - Lawrence B Marks
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Lineberger Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Jimm Grimm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ThedaCare Regional Medical Center, Appleton, WI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Iovoli AJ, Prasad S, Malhotra HK, Malik NK, Fung-Kee-Fung S, Singh AK, Farrugia MK. Brachial Plexopathy After Single-Fraction Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in Apical Lung Tumors. Pract Radiat Oncol 2022; 13:e246-e253. [PMID: 36581198 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2022.12.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2022] [Revised: 11/30/2022] [Accepted: 12/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence of brachial plexus injury (BPI) after single-fraction stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to apical lung tumors. METHODS AND MATERIALS A retrospective cohort analysis was performed of all patients treated with single-fraction lung SBRT at our institution from 2007 to 2022. Apical tumors were identified as those with an epicenter located above the arch of the aorta. Dosimetric analysis of dose to the brachial plexus (BP) was done using both the subclavian vessel (SCV) surrogate structure and anatomic BP. BPI was assessed per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0, as regional paresthesia, marked discomfort and muscle weakness, and limited movement of the arm or hand. RESULTS A total of 45 patients met inclusion criteria with median follow-up of 21 months. There were 9 patients who exceeded the BP dose constraint using the SCV or anatomic BP volume. Only 1 patient (2.2%) developed grade 2 BPI, occurring 7 months after SBRT. Dose to the anatomic BP for the affected patient was 26.39 Gy. For the entire cohort, the median SCV and anatomic maximum BP doses were 8.44 and 7.14 Gy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS There is considerable variability in dose delivered to the BP after SBRT to apical lung tumors. BPI after single-fraction SBRT to apical tumors is rare and rates are comparable with those reported with multifraction regimens.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Austin J Iovoli
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York
| | - Sharan Prasad
- College of Human Ecology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
| | - Harish K Malhotra
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York
| | - Nadia K Malik
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York
| | - Simon Fung-Kee-Fung
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York
| | - Anurag K Singh
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York
| | - Mark K Farrugia
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Lee SL, Faruqi S. Ten Percent Plexopathy Is Acceptable in This Case. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 114:183-184. [PMID: 36055315 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.07.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2022] [Revised: 06/29/2022] [Accepted: 07/13/2022] [Indexed: 10/14/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Sangjune Laurence Lee
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Center, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Salman Faruqi
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Center, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pham HH, Newman N, Osmundson EC. Radiation-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy After Thoracic Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy: Case Report. JTO Clin Res Rep 2022; 3:100370. [PMID: 35875465 PMCID: PMC9304607 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2022.100370] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2022] [Revised: 06/14/2022] [Accepted: 06/16/2022] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is a highly effective treatment for medically inoperable patients with early stage NSCLC. Because of its noninvasive nature and favorable toxicity profile, the use of SABR continues to expand for eligible patients. We present here two uncommon cases of peripheral neuropathy secondary to SABR-induced injury to recurrent laryngeal and phrenic nerves, resulting in unilateral vocal cord and diaphragmatic paralysis, respectively.
Collapse
|