Tumor volume: a basic and specific response predictor in radiotherapy

Dubben, Hans-Hermann; Thames, Howard D.; Beck‐Bornholdt, Hans‐Peter

doi:10.1016/s0167-8140(97)00215-6

Cited by 193 publications

(118 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

108

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Usefulness of tumor size/volume as an overall prognostic factor for survival is still under discussion (7)(8)(9). Correlation of pretreatment tumor size with local control suggests that such tumor characteristics as size could possibly be used to anticipate the amount of GTV regression during a course of treatment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive Radiotherapy Planning on Decreasing Gross Tumor Volumes as Seen on Megavoltage Computed Tomography Images

Woodford

Yartsev

Dar

et al. 2007

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

156

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To evaluate gross tumor volume (GTV) changes for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer by using daily megavoltage (MV) computed tomography (CT) studies acquired before each treatment fraction on helical tomotherapy and to relate the potential benefit of adaptive image-guided radiotherapy to changes in GTV. Methods and Materials: Seventeen patients were prescribed 30 fractions of radiotherapy on helical tomotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer at London Regional Cancer Program from Dec 2005 to March 2007. The GTV was contoured on the daily MVCT studies of each patient. Adapted plans were created using merged MVCT-kilovoltage CT image sets to investigate the advantages of replanning for patients with differing GTV regression characteristics.Results: Average GTV change observed over 30 fractions was À38%, ranging from À12 to À87%. No significant correlation was observed between GTV change and patient's physical or tumor features. Patterns of GTV changes in the 17 patients could be divided broadly into three groups with distinctive potential for benefit from adaptive planning. Conclusions: Changes in GTV are difficult to predict quantitatively based on patient or tumor characteristics. If changes occur, there are points in time during the treatment course when it may be appropriate to adapt the plan to improve sparing of normal tissues. If GTV decreases by greater than 30% at any point in the first 20 fractions of treatment, adaptive planning is appropriate to further improve the therapeutic ratio. Ó 2007 Elsevier Inc.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive Radiotherapy Planning on Decreasing Gross Tumor Volumes as Seen on Megavoltage Computed Tomography Images

Woodford

Yartsev

Dar

et al. 2007

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

156

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although many trials have been reported in the literature regarding tumor diameter, few studies exist concerning tumor volume (20)(21)(22). However, the tumor volume calculated by 3D imaging techniques has been reported to be an independent marker in predicting the outcome in pharyngolaryngeal, lung, and breast cancers (5). Tumor volume has been the basic criterion for deciding the treatment outcome in radiotherapy (5).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the tumor volume calculated by 3D imaging techniques has been reported to be an independent marker in predicting the outcome in pharyngolaryngeal, lung, and breast cancers (5). Tumor volume has been the basic criterion for deciding the treatment outcome in radiotherapy (5). Measuring the tumor volume in the brain allows making a decision on the prognosis and treatment of the patient (7).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…enal cell carcinoma (RCC) constitutes 85% of all primary malignant tumors arising from kidney and nearly 3% of adult cancers (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6). Approximately 20%-30% of patients diagnosed with RCC have metastasis at the time of diagnosis (1).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several trials have been conducted concerning the diameter of tumors in RCC; however, few trials exist regarding the tumor volume. Tumor volume calculated using three-dimensional (3D) imaging techniques is accepted as independent marker in predicting the outcome in pharyngolaryngeal, lung, and breast cancers (5). Tumor volume is the basic criterion for deciding the treatment outcome in radiotherapy (7).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The effect of tumor volume on survival in renal cell carcinoma patients

Seçil

Çullu²,

Aslan³

et al. 2012

Diagn Interv Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

480R enal cell carcinoma (RCC) constitutes 85% of all primary malignant tumors arising from kidney and nearly 3% of adult cancers (1-6). Approximately 20%-30% of patients diagnosed with RCC have metastasis at the time of diagnosis (1). In patients with recurrent RCC, progression of the disease, the period of survival, and the disease process can be predicted owing to many morphological, clinical, histological, and molecular parameters (3). The prognostic markers of RCC include tumor node metastasis (TNM) stage as morphological marker; histological type, nuclear grade, tumor necrosis, and sarcomatoid change as histological markers; and factors such as adhesion molecules, molecules stimulating immune response, growth factor receptors, and molecules inducing hypoxia as molecular and genetic markers (3). Clinical and laboratory prognostic factors are represented by the following parameters: patient performance at tumor presentation, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate, thrombocyte count, as well as serum calcium, hemoglobin, and lactate dehydrogenase levels. Among these, tumor stage, grade, and patient performance are the most widely used. Many studies on molecular and cytogenetic markers have been performed but none has been found to be better than tumor stage and nuclear grade to estimate prognosis. For this reason, efforts for determining new prognostic factors that indicate the proliferation and progression of RCC still persist (2-4). Several trials have been conducted concerning the diameter of tumors in RCC; however, few trials exist regarding the tumor volume. Tumor volume calculated using three-dimensional (3D) imaging techniques is accepted as independent marker in predicting the outcome in pharyngolaryngeal, lung, and breast cancers (5). Tumor volume is the basic criterion for deciding the treatment outcome in radiotherapy (7). Measuring the volume of brain tumors allows making decision on the prognosis and treatment of the patient (8).The aim of our study was to investigate the effect of tumor volume on prognosis and the relation of tumor volume to other prognostic markers in patients with RCC. Materials and methodsThe study included 46 retrospectively assessed patients (32 males and 14 females; mean age, 58.13±10.47 years; age range, 33-81 years) who underwent surgery between January 2002 and January 2009 and received a diagnosis of RCC. Considering January 1, 2009 as the deadline, the clinical information and the last health status of all patients were obtained from the hospital information system and/or by contacting the patients or their relatives who agreed to communicate by phone. The study was approved by the local ethics committee of our institution. GENITOURINARY IMAGING ORIGINAL ARTICLE The effect of tumor volume on survival in patients with renal cell carcinomaMustafa Seçil, Neşat Çullu, Güven Aslan, Uğur Mungan, Fatma Uysal, Burçin Tuna, Kutsal Yörükoğlu MATERIALS AND METHODSThe study included 46 retrospectively assessed patients with RCC (32 males and 14 females; mean age, 58.13±10.47 years) ...

show abstract

Tumor, Host, and Environment‐related Prognostic Factors

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the current climate of knowledge in oncology, an understanding of factors that govern outcome in cancer patients is essential to achieve the maximum therapeutic benefit. Discipline in the approach to patient management allows the most advantageous application of current evidence and leads to best practice. To determine prognosis it is helpful to consider tumor‐related prognostic factors that characterize the disease, host‐related prognostic factors that typify the patient, and environment‐related factors, which are external factors not directly related to either the disease or the patient. In this chapter, we review the most common factors in each of these categories. The discussion will focus on prognostic factors that are relevant at the time of diagnosis and initial treatment. However we caution that, in the management of a cancer patient, determination of prognosis could be required repeatedly to take account of multiple episodes throughout the course of the disease. Frequently these situations reflect decision‐making points (e.g., concerning adjuvant therapy, management of recurrent cancer, and palliative or terminal care). The diversity and impact of prognostic factors in each category will be demonstrated using examples from the recent literature. A comprehensive review of prognostic factors in distinct cancers follows in Part B of the book. Most cancer literature equates prognosis with tumor characteristics. Cancer pathology and anatomic disease extent account for most variations in cancer outcome. Since screening and early detection allow for diagnosis of small localized cancers, however, environmental factors are likely to have a more pronounced impact on outcome. This is particularly so as treatment becomes more effective. In addition, these factors are easier to influence by applying currently existing knowledge compared to those factors at the host or tumor level that are ingrained permanently in the phenotype of the case. The environmental factors are also the least studied despite evidence that they may have profound impact on outcome. For example, we reviewed Medline ® publications between December 1, 1998 and November 30, 1999 under the search terms “prognostic factors in cancer” and “human” and “English language.” This revealed 21 of 983 papers on prognostic factors in cancer dealing with environment‐related factors, as indicated by their titles. In contrast, the same search yielded 189 publications with titles focusing on genetic or molecular prognostic factors. It would seem from this initial and potentially superficial examination that a disproportionate neglect of prognostic factors other than those related to the tumor might exist. This warrants further evaluation, since it is possible that an alternative situation is that the nontumor factors are either too few in number, not relevant to patient outcome, or will soon be surpassed by an overwhelming influence of new factors that are being detected with modern techniques. We believe that the latter is unlikely in the foreseeable future and that all of these factors are highly relevant to the task of uncovering prognosis in cancer.

show abstract

Tumor volume: a basic and specific response predictor in radiotherapy

Cited by 193 publications

References 27 publications

Adaptive Radiotherapy Planning on Decreasing Gross Tumor Volumes as Seen on Megavoltage Computed Tomography Images

Adaptive Radiotherapy Planning on Decreasing Gross Tumor Volumes as Seen on Megavoltage Computed Tomography Images

The effect of tumor volume on survival in renal cell carcinoma patients

Tumor, Host, and Environment‐related Prognostic Factors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About