A proliferation saturation index to predict radiation response and personalize radiotherapy fractionation

Radiation Oncology

Heiko Enderling¹  Louis B. Harrison⁴  Robert Myerson⁵  Jae K. Lee²  Kujtim Latifi⁴  Javier F. Torres-Roca⁴  Jimmy Caudell⁴  Jan Poleszczuk¹  Eduardo G. Moros³  Sotiris Prokopiou¹ 

[1] Departments of Integrated Mathematical Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, 12902 Magnolia Drive, Tampa 33612, FL, USA;Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, 12902 Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL, USA;Department of Cancer Imaging and Metabolism, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, 12902 Magnolia Drive, Tampa 33612, FL, USA;Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, 12902 Magnolia Drive, Tampa 33612, FL, USA;Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA

关键词: Hyperfractionation;    Mathematical model;    Logistic tumor growth;    Personalized radiotherapy;    Proliferation saturation index;   

Others  :  1228486
DOI  :  10.1186/s13014-015-0465-x

 received in 2015-03-31, accepted in 2015-07-16,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Although altered protocols that challenge conventional radiation fractionation have been tested in prospective clinical trials, we still have limited understanding of how to select the most appropriate fractionation schedule for individual patients. Currently, the prescription of definitive radiotherapy is based on the primary site and stage, without regard to patient-specific tumor or host factors that may influence outcome. We hypothesize that the proportion of radiosensitive proliferating cells is dependent on the saturation of the tumor carrying capacity. This may serve as a prognostic factor for personalized radiotherapy (RT) fractionation.

Methods

We introduce a proliferation saturation index (PSI), which is defined as the ratio of tumor volume to the host-influenced tumor carrying capacity. Carrying capacity is as a conceptual measure of the maximum volume that can be supported by the current tumor environment including oxygen and nutrient availability, immune surveillance and acidity. PSI is estimated from two temporally separated routine pre-radiotherapy computed tomography scans and a deterministic logistic tumor growth model. We introduce the patient-specific pre-treatment PSI into a model of tumor growth and radiotherapy response, and fit the model to retrospective data of four non-small cell lung cancer patients treated exclusively with standard fractionation. We then simulate both a clinical trial hyperfractionation protocol and daily fractionations, with equal biologically effective dose, to compare tumor volume reduction as a function of pretreatment PSI.

Results

With tumor doubling time and radiosensitivity assumed constant across patients, a patient-specific pretreatment PSI is sufficient to fit individual patient response data (R ²  = 0.98). PSI varies greatly between patients (coefficient of variation >128 %) and correlates inversely with radiotherapy response. For this study, our simulations suggest that only patients with intermediate PSI (0.45–0.9) are likely to truly benefit from hyperfractionation. For up to 20 % uncertainties in tumor growth rate, radiosensitivity, and noise in radiological data, the absolute estimation error of pretreatment PSI is <10 % for more than 75 % of patients.

Conclusions

Routine radiological images can be used to calculate individual PSI, which may serve as a prognostic factor for radiation response. This provides a new paradigm and rationale to select personalized RT dose-fractionation.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Prokopiou et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Yan D, Lockman D, Brabbins D, Tyburski L, Martinez A. An off-line strategy for constructing a patient-specific planning target volume in adaptive treatment process for prostate cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2000; 48:289-302.
• [2]Woodford C, Yartsev S, Dar AR, Bauman G, Van Dyk J. Adaptive radiotherapy planning on decreasing gross tumor volumes as seen on megavoltage computed tomography images. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2007; 69:1316-1322.
• [3]Feng M, Kong F-M, Gross M, Fernando S, Hayman JA, Ten Haken RK. Using fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to assess tumor volume during radiotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer and its potential impact on adaptive dose escalation and normal tissue sparing. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2009; 73:1228-1234.
• [4]Veiga C, McClelland J, Moinuddin S, Lourenço A, Ricketts K, Annkah J et al.. Toward adaptive radiotherapy for head and neck patients: Feasibility study on using CT-to-CBCT deformable registration for “dose of the day” calculations. Med. Phys. 2014; 41:031703.
• [5]Sharma N, Neumann D, Macklis R. The impact of functional imaging on radiation medicine. Radiat. Oncol. 2008; 3:25. BioMed Central Full Text
• [6]Rockne RC, Trister AD, Jacobs J, Hawkins-Daarud AJ, Neal ML, Hendrickson K, et al. A patient-specific computational model of hypoxia-modulated radiation resistance in glioblastoma using 18F-FMISO-PET. J R Soc Interface. 2015;12.
• [7]Bhatnagar P, Subesinghe M, Patel C, Prestwich R, Scarsbrook AF. Functional imaging for radiation treatment planning, response assessment, and adaptive therapy in head and neck cancer. Radiographics. 2013; 33:1909-1929.
• [8]Clausen MM, Hansen AE, Lundemann M, Hollensen C, Pommer T, Munck Af Rosenschöld P et al.. Dose painting based on tumor uptake of Cu-ATSM and FDG: a comparative study. Radiat. Oncol. 2014; 9:228. BioMed Central Full Text
• [9]Ahmed KA, Correa CR, Dilling TJ, Rao NG, Shridhar R, Trotti AM et al.. Altered fractionation schedules in radiation treatment: a review. Semin. Oncol. 2014; 41:730-750.
• [10]Prasanna A, Ahmed MM, Mohiuddin M, Coleman CN. Exploiting sensitization windows of opportunity in hyper and hypo-fractionated radiation therapy. J Thorac Dis. 2014; 6:287-302.
• [11]Folkman J, Merler E, Abernathy C, Williams G. Isolation of a tumor fractor responsible for angiogenesis. J Exp Med. 1971; 133:275-288.
• [12]Kallinowski F, Okunieff P. Blod flow, oxygen and nutrient suppy, and metabolic microenvironment of human tumors: a review. Cancer Res. 1989; 49:6449-6465.
• [13]Roose T, Netti PA, Munn LL, Boucher Y, Jain RK. Solid stress generated by spheroid growth estimated using a linear poroelasticity model. Microvasc. Res. 2003; 66:204-212.
• [14]Dunn GP, Bruce AT, Ikeda H, Old LJ, Schreiber RD. Cancer immunoediting: from immunosurveillance to tumor escape. Nat. Immunol. 2002; 3:991-998.
• [15]Wilkie KP, Hahnfeldt P. Mathematical models of immune-induced cancer dormancy and the emergence of immune evasion. Interface Focus. 2013;3:20130010–0.
• [16]Enderling H, Park D, Hlatky LR, Hahnfeldt P. The Importance of Spatial Distribution of Stemness and Proliferation State in Determining Tumor Radioresponse. Math Model Nat Phenom. 2009; 4:117-133.
• [17]Gao X, McDonald JT, Hlatky LR, Enderling H. Acute and fractionated irradiation differentially modulate glioma stem cell division kinetics. Cancer Res. 2013; 73:1481-1490.
• [18]Rockne R, Rockhill JK, Mrugala M, Spence AM, Kalet I, Hendrickson K et al.. Predicting the efficacy of radiotherapy in individual glioblastoma patients in vivo: a mathematical modeling approach. Phys. Med. Biol. 2010; 55:3271-3285.
• [19]Folkman J, Hochberg M. Self-regulation of growth in three dimensions. J. Exp. Med. 1973; 138:745-753.
• [20]Almog N, Henke V, Flores L, Hlatky LR, Kung AL, Wright RD et al.. Prolonged dormancy of human liposarcoma is associated with impaired tumor angiogenesis. FASEB J. 2006; 20:947-949.
• [21]Hahnfeldt P, Panigrahy D, Folkman J, Hlatky LR. Tumor development under angiogenic signaling: a dynamical theory of tumor growth, treatment response, and postvascular dormancy. Cancer Res. 1999; 59:4770-4775.
• [22]Freyer JP, Sutherland RM. Regulation of growth saturation and development of necrosis in EMT6/Ro multicellular spheroids by the glucose and oxygen supply. Cancer Res. 1986; 46:3504-3512.
• [23]Dale RG, Jones B: Radiobiological Modelling in Radiation Oncology. British Inst of Radiology; 2007.
• [24]Chougule A, Supe SJ. Linear quadratic model--estimation of alpha/beta ratio for mucosal reaction. Strahlenther. Onkol. 1993; 169:427-430.
• [25]Fowler JF. The linear-quadratic formula and progress in fractionated radiotherapy. Br. J. Radiol. 2014; 62:679-694.
• [26]Yorio JT, Xie Y, Yan J, Gerber DE. Lung cancer diagnostic and treatment intervals in the United States: a health care disparity? J. Thorac. Oncol. 2009; 4:1322-1330.
• [27]Wang P, Feng Y. A mathematical model of tumor volume changes during radiotherapy. Sci World J. 2013; 2013:1-5.
• [28]Park LJ, Park CH, Park C, Lee T. Application of genetic algorithms to parameter estimation of bioprocesses. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 1997; 35:47-49.
• [29]Shibamoto Y, Hara M: Radiobiology of normal lung tissue and lung tumours. Med Radiol Radiat Oncol 2005:59–65.
• [30]Maciejewski B, Withers HR, Taylor JM, Hliniak A. Dose fractionation and regeneration in radiotherapy for cancer of the oral cavity and oropharynx: tumor dose–response and repopulation. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1989; 16:831-843.
• [31]Fowler JF, Chappell R. Non-small cell lung tumors repopulate rapidly during radiation therapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2000; 46:516-517.
• [32]Fowler JF. Linear quadratics is alive and well: in regard to Park et al. (Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;70:847–852). Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2008; 72:957-958.
• [33]Chi A, Wen S, Liao Z, Fowler J, Xu J, Nguyen NP et al.. What would be the most appropriate α/β ratio in the setting of stereotactic body radiation therapy for early stage non-small cell lung cancer. Biomed Res Int. 2013; 2013:391021.
• [34]Buch K, Peters T, Nawroth T, Sänger M, Schmidberger H, Langguth P. Determination of cell survival after irradiation via clonogenic assay versus multiple MTT Assay - A comparative study. Radiat. Oncol. 2012; 7:1. BioMed Central Full Text
• [35]Wee CW, Sung W, Kang H-C, Cho KH, Han TJ, Jeong B-K et al.. Evaluation of variability in target volume delineation for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a multi-institutional study from the Korean Radiation Oncology Group. Radiat. Oncol. 2015; 10:137. BioMed Central Full Text
• [36]Sause W, Kolesar P, Taylor S, Johnson D, Livingston R, Komaki R et al.. Final results of phase III trial in regionally advanced unresectable non-small cell lung cancer: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, and Southwest Oncology Group. Chest. 2000; 117:358-364.
• [37]Unger K. Integrative radiation systems biology. Radiat. Oncol. 2014; 9:21. BioMed Central Full Text
• [38]Eschrich SA, Pramana J, Zhang H, Zhao H, Boulware D, Lee J-H et al.. A gene expression model of intrinsic tumor radiosensitivity: prediction of response and prognosis after chemoradiation. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2009; 75:489-496.
• [39]Eschrich SA, Fulp WJ, Pawitan Y, Foekens JA, Smid M, Martens JWM et al.. Validation of a radiosensitivity molecular signature in breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2012; 18:5134-5143.