Conventional dose rate spatially-fractionated radiation therapy (SFRT) treatment response and its association with dosimetric parameters—A preclinical study in a Fischer 344 rat model

Judith N Rivera, Thomas M Kierski, Sandeep K Kasoji, Anthony S Abrantes, Paul A Dayton and Sha X Chang

PLOS ONE, 2020, vol. 15, issue 6, 1-22

Abstract: Purpose: To identify key dosimetric parameters that have close associations with tumor treatment response and body weight change in SFRT treatments with a large range of spatial-fractionation scale at dose rates of several Gy/min. Methods: Six study arms using uniform tumor radiation, half-tumor radiation, 2mm beam array radiation, 0.3mm minibeam radiation, and an untreated arm were used. All treatments were delivered on a 320kV x-ray irradiator. Forty-two female Fischer 344 rats with fibrosarcoma tumor allografts were used. Dosimetric parameters studied are peak dose and width, valley dose and width, peak-to-valley-dose-ratio (PVDR), volumetric average dose, percentage volume directly irradiated, and tumor- and normal-tissue EUD. Animal survival, tumor volume change, and body weight change (indicative of treatment toxicity) are tested for association with the dosimetric parameters using linear regression and Cox Proportional Hazards models. Results: The dosimetric parameters most closely associated with tumor response are tumor EUD (R2 = 0.7923, F-stat = 15.26*; z-test = -4.07***), valley (minimum) dose (R2 = 0.7636, F-stat = 12.92*; z-test = -4.338***), and percentage tumor directly irradiated (R2 = 0.7153, F-stat = 10.05*; z-test = -3.837***) per the linear regression and Cox Proportional Hazards models, respectively. Tumor response is linearly proportional to valley (minimum) doses and tumor EUD. Average dose (R2 = 0.2745, F-stat = 1.514 (no sig.); z-test = -2.811**) and peak dose (R2 = 0.04472, F-stat = 0.6874 (not sig.); z-test = -0.786 (not sig.)) show the weakest associations to tumor response. Only the uniform radiation arm did not gain body weight post-radiation, indicative of treatment toxicity; however, body weight change in general shows weak association with all dosimetric parameters except for valley (minimum) dose (R2 = 0.3814, F-stat = 13.56**), valley width (R2 = 0.2853, F-stat = 8.783**), and peak width (R2 = 0.2759, F-stat = 8.382**). Conclusions: For a single-fraction SFRT at conventional dose rates, valley, not peak, dose is closely associated with tumor treatment response and thus should be used for treatment prescription. Tumor EUD, valley (minimum) dose, and percentage tumor directly irradiated are the top three dosimetric parameters that exhibited close associations with tumor response.

Date: 2020
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0229053 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 29053&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0229053

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229053

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().