1
|
Mahajan A, Stavinoha PL, Rongthong W, Brodin NP, McGovern SL, El Naqa I, Palmer JD, Vennarini S, Indelicato DJ, Aridgides P, Bowers DC, Kremer L, Ronckers C, Constine L, Avanzo M. Neurocognitive Effects and Necrosis in Childhood Cancer Survivors Treated With Radiation Therapy: A PENTEC Comprehensive Review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 119:401-416. [PMID: 33810950 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.11.073] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 28.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2020] [Revised: 11/08/2020] [Accepted: 11/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE A PENTEC review of childhood cancer survivors who received brain radiation therapy (RT) was performed to develop models that aid in developing dose constraints for RT-associated central nervous system (CNS) morbidities. METHODS AND MATERIALS A comprehensive literature search, through the PENTEC initiative, was performed to identify published data pertaining to 6 specific CNS toxicities in children treated with brain RT. Treatment and outcome data on survivors were extracted and used to generate normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models. RESULTS The search identified investigations pertaining to 2 of the 6 predefined CNS outcomes: neurocognition and brain necrosis. For neurocognition, models for 2 post-RT outcomes were developed to (1) calculate the risk for a below-average intelligence quotient (IQ) (IQ <85) and (2) estimate the expected IQ value. The models suggest that there is a 5% risk of a subsequent IQ <85 when 10%, 20%, 50%, or 100% of the brain is irradiated to 35.7, 29.1, 22.2, or 18.1 Gy, respectively (all at 2 Gy/fraction and without methotrexate). Methotrexate (MTX) increased the risk for an IQ <85 similar to a generalized uniform brain dose of 5.9 Gy. The model for predicting expected IQ also includes the effect of dose, age, and MTX. Each of these factors has an independent, but probably cumulative effect on IQ. The necrosis model estimates a 5% risk of necrosis for children after 59.8 Gy or 63.6 Gy (2 Gy/fraction) to any part of the brain if delivered as primary RT or reirradiation, respectively. CONCLUSIONS This PENTEC comprehensive review establishes objective relationships between patient age, RT dose, RT volume, and MTX to subsequent risks of neurocognitive injury and necrosis. A lack of consistent RT data and outcome reporting in the published literature hindered investigation of the other predefined CNS morbidity endpoints.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anita Mahajan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
| | - Peter L Stavinoha
- Division of Pediatrics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Warissara Rongthong
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - N Patrik Brodin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center and Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York
| | - Susan L McGovern
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Issam El Naqa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Joshua D Palmer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, James Cancer Hospital at Ohio State University, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Sabina Vennarini
- Proton Therapy Center, Azienda Provinciale per I Servizi Sanitari, Trento, Italy
| | - Daniel J Indelicato
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
| | - Paul Aridgides
- Department of Radiation Oncology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York
| | - Daniel C Bowers
- Division of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical School, Dallas, Texas
| | - Leontien Kremer
- Department of Pediatrics, UMC Amsterdam, Location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Pediatric Oncology, Princess Máxima Center for Paediatric Oncology, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Cecile Ronckers
- Department of Pediatrics, UMC Amsterdam, Location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Pediatric Oncology, Princess Máxima Center for Paediatric Oncology, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Medical University Brandenburg-Theodor Fontane, Neuruppin, Germany
| | - Louis Constine
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York
| | - Michele Avanzo
- Medical Physics Department, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Eichkorn T, Lischalk JW, Sandrini E, Meixner E, Regnery S, Held T, Bauer J, Bahn E, Harrabi S, Hörner-Rieber J, Herfarth K, Debus J, König L. Iatrogenic Influence on Prognosis of Radiation-Induced Contrast Enhancements in Patients with Glioma WHO 1-3 following Photon and Proton Radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2022; 175:133-143. [PMID: 36041565 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.08.025] [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: 03/17/2022] [Revised: 07/20/2022] [Accepted: 08/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Radiation-induced contrast enhancement (RICE) is a common side effect following radiotherapy for glioma, but both diagnosis and handling are challenging. Due to the potential risks associated with RICE and its challenges in differentiating RICE from tumor progression, it is critical to better understand how RICE prognosis depends on iatrogenic influence. MATERIALS AND METHODS We identified 99 patients diagnosed with RICE who were previously treated with either photon or proton therapy for World Health Organization (WHO) grade 1-3 primary gliomas. Post-treatment brain MRI-based volumetric analysis and clinical data collection was performed at multiple time points. RESULTS The most common histologic subtypes were astrocytoma (50%) and oligodendroglioma (46%). In 67%, it was graded WHO grade 2 and in 86% an IDH mutation was present. RICE first occurred after 16 months (range: 1 - 160) in median. At initial RICE occurrence, 39% were misinterpreted as tumor progression. A tumor-specific therapy including chemotherapy or re-irradiation led to a RICE size progression in 86% and 92% of cases, respectively and RICE symptom progression in 57% and 65% of cases, respectively. A RICE-specific therapy such as corticosteroids or Bevacizumab for larger or symptomatic RICE led to a RICE size regression in 81% of cases with symptom stability or regression in 62% of cases. CONCLUSIONS While with chemotherapy and re-irradiation a RICE progression was frequently observed, anti-edematous or anti-VEGF treatment frequently went along with a RICE regression. For RICE, correct diagnosis and treatment decisions are challenging and critical and should be made interdisciplinarily.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tanja Eichkorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Jonathan W Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Health at Long Island, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Elisabetta Sandrini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Eva Meixner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Sebastian Regnery
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Thomas Held
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Julia Bauer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Emanuel Bahn
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Semi Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Research progress on mechanism and dosimetry of brainstem injury induced by intensity-modulated radiotherapy, proton therapy, and heavy ion radiotherapy. Eur Radiol 2020; 30:5011-5020. [PMID: 32318844 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-06843-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2020] [Revised: 03/11/2020] [Accepted: 03/30/2020] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
Radiotherapy (RT) is an effective method for treating head and neck cancer (HNC). However, RT may cause side effects during and after treatment. Radiation-induced brainstem injury (BSI) is often neglected due to its low incidence and short survival time and because it is indistinguishable from intracranial tumor progression. It is currently believed that the possible mechanism of radiation-induced BSI includes increased expression of vascular endothelial growth factor and damage of vascular endothelial cells, neurons, and glial cells as well as an inflammatory response and oxidative stress. At present, it is still difficult to avoid BSI even with several advanced RT techniques. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is the most commonly used therapeutic technique in the field of RT. Compared with early conformal therapy, it has greatly reduced the injury to normal tissues. Proton beam radiotherapy (PBT) and heavy ion radiotherapy (HIT) have good dose distribution due to the presence of a Bragg peak, which not only results in better control of the tumor but also minimizes the dose to the surrounding normal tissues. There are many clinical studies on BSI caused by IMRT, PBT, and HIT. In this paper, we review the mechanism, dosimetry, and other aspects of BSI caused by IMRT, PBT, and HIT.Key Points• Enhanced MRI imaging can better detect radiation-induced BSI early.• This article summarized the dose constraints of brainstem toxicity in clinical studies using different techniques including IMRT, PBT, and HIT and recommended better dose constraints pattern to clinicians.• The latest pathological mechanism of radiation-induced BSI and the corresponding advanced treatment methods will be discussed.
Collapse
|