4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Radiation pneumonitis:: Local dose versus [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake response in irradiated lung

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.01.031

关键词

radiation pneumonitis; pulmonary injury; computed tomography; positron emission tomography

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To quantify the relationship between the local radiation dose received and the posttreatment positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) [F-18]2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in the lung. Methods and Materials: The data from 36 patients treated for esophageal cancer with thoracic radiotherapy who underwent restaging PET/CT imaging between 4 and 12 weeks after radiotherapy completion were evaluated. Their treatment planning CT was registered with the restaging PET/CT. Using histogram analysis, the voxel average FDG-PET uptake vs. radiation dose was obtained for each case. Hierarchical linear regression models for each patient were applied to study the variation in the linear trends between cases. Deviation of the dose-response curve from a linear model was tested. Results: The median time between radiotherapy completion and FDG-PET imaging was 40 days (range, 26-70 days). The median of the mean standard uptake value in the lung that received 0-5 Gy was 0.63 (range, 0.36-1.27), 5-10 Gy was 0.77 (range, 0.40-1.35), 10-20 Gy was 0.80 (range, 0.40-1.72), and >20 Gy was 1.08 (range, 0.44-2.63). A hierarchical linear regression model of the radiation dose and normalized FDG uptake per case found an adequate fit with the linear model, and the addition of quadratic and logarithmic functions did not improve the fit. The 36 cases had a posterior mean of slopes range of 0.0048-0.069. Conclusion: The regional dose vs. radiation pneumonitis response was evaluated with FDG-PET/CT imaging. Statistical modeling found a linear relationship. The slope of this relationship varied over an order of magnitude, reflecting the range of the underlying biological response to radiation among the study population. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据