IMPORTANCE The most appropriate dose-fractionation for whole breast irradiation (WBI) remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE To assess acute and six-month toxicity and quality of life (QoL) with conventionally fractionated WBI (CF-WBI) versus hypofractionated WBI (HF-WBI). DESIGN Unblinded randomized trial of CF-WBI (n=149; 50 Gy/25 fractions + boost [10–14 Gy/5–7 fractions]) versus HF-WBI (n=138; 42.56 Gy/16 fractions + boost [10–12.5 Gy/4–5 fractions]). SETTING Community-based and academic cancer centers. PARTICIPANTS 287 women age ≥ 40 years with stage 0–II breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery for whom whole breast irradiation without addition of a third field was recommended. 76% (n=217) were overweight or obese. Patients were enrolled from February 2011 through February 2014. INTERVENTION(S) FOR CLINICAL TRIALS CF-WBI versus HF-WBI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Physician-reported acute and six-month toxicities using NCICTCv4.0 and patient-reported QoL using the FACT-B version 4. All analyses were intention-to-treat, with outcomes compared using chi-square, Cochran-Armitage test, and ordinal logistic regression. Patients were followed for a minimum of 6 months. RESULTS Treatment arms were well-matched for baseline characteristics including FACT-B total score (P=0.46) and individual QoL items such as lack of energy (P=0.86) and trouble meeting family needs (P=0.54). Maximal physician-reported acute dermatitis (P<0.001), pruritus (P<0.001), breast pain (P=0.001), hyperpigmentation (P=0.002), and fatigue (P=0.02) during radiation were lower in patients randomized to HF-WBI. Overall grade ≥2 acute toxicity was less with HF-WBI vs. CF-WBI (47% vs. 78%; P<0.001). Six months after radiation, physicians reported less fatigue in patients randomized to HF-WBI (P=0.01), and patients randomized to HF-WBI reported less lack of energy (P<0.001) and less trouble meeting family needs (P=0.01). Multivariable regression confirmed the superiority of HF-WBI in terms of patient-reported lack of energy (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24–0.63) and trouble meeting family needs (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.16–0.75). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE HF-WBI appears to yield less acute toxicity than CF-WBI, as well as less fatigue and trouble meeting family needs six months after completing radiation. These findings should be communicated to patients as part of shared decision-making. TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT01266642 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01266642)
No abstract
Rationale and Objectives Landmark point-pairs provide a strategy to assess deformable image registration (DIR) accuracy in terms of the spatial registration of the underlying anatomy depicted in medical images. In this study, we propose to augment a publicly available database (www.dir-lab.com) of medical images with large sets of manually identified anatomic feature pairs between breath-hold computed tomography (BH-CT) images for DIR spatial accuracy evaluation. Materials and Methods 10 BH-CT image pairs were randomly selected from the COPDgene study cases. Each patient had received CT imaging of the entire thorax in the supine position at 1/4th dose normal expiration and maximum effort full dose inspiration. Using dedicated in-house software, an imaging expert manually identified large sets of anatomic feature pairs between images. Estimates of inter- and intra-observer spatial variation in feature localization were determined by repeat measurements of multiple observers over subsets of randomly selected features. Results 7298 anatomic landmark features were manually paired between the 10 sets of images. Quantity of feature pairs per case ranged from 447 to 1172. Average 3D Euclidean landmark displacements varied substantially among cases, ranging from 12.29 (SD: 6.39) to 30.90 (SD: 14.05) mm. Repeat registration of uniformly sampled subsets of 150 landmarks for each case yielded estimates of observer localization error, which ranged in average from 0.58 (SD: 0.87) to 1.06 (SD: 2.38) mm for each case. Conclusions The additions to the online web database (www.dir-lab.com) described in this work will broaden the applicability of the reference data, providing a freely available common dataset for targeted critical evaluation of DIR spatial accuracy performance in multiple clinical settings. Estimates of observer variance in feature localization suggest consistent spatial accuracy for all observers across both 4D CT and COPDgene patient cohorts.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to quantify the effect of four image registration methods on lung texture features extracted from serial computed tomography (CT) scans obtained from healthy human subjects. Methods: Two chest CT scans acquired at different time points were collected retrospectively for each of 27 patients. Following automated lung segmentation, each follow-up CT scan was registered to the baseline scan using four algorithms: (1) rigid, (2) affine, (3) B-splines deformable, and (4) demons deformable. The registration accuracy for each scan pair was evaluated by measuring the Euclidean distance between 150 identified landmarks. On average, 1432 spatially matched 32 × 32-pixel region-of-interest (ROI) pairs were automatically extracted from each scan pair. Firstorder, fractal, Fourier, Laws' filter, and gray-level co-occurrence matrix texture features were calculated in each ROI, for a total of 140 features. Agreement between baseline and follow-up scan ROI feature values was assessed by Bland-Altman analysis for each feature; the range spanned by the 95% limits of agreement of feature value differences was calculated and normalized by the average feature value to obtain the normalized range of agreement (nRoA). Features with small nRoA were considered "registration-stable." The normalized bias for each feature was calculated from the feature value differences between baseline and follow-up scans averaged across all ROIs in every patient. Because patients had "normal" chest CT scans, minimal change in texture feature values between scan pairs was anticipated, with the expectation of small bias and narrow limits of agreement. Results: Registration with demons reduced the Euclidean distance between landmarks such that only 9% of landmarks were separated by ≥1 mm, compared with rigid (98%), affine (95%), and B-splines (90%). Ninety-nine of the 140 (71%) features analyzed yielded nRoA > 50% for all registration methods, indicating that the majority of feature values were perturbed following registration. Nineteen of the features (14%) had nRoA < 15% following demons registration, indicating relative feature value stability. Student's t-tests showed that the nRoA of these 19 features was significantly larger when rigid, affine, or B-splines registration methods were used compared with demons registration. Demons registration yielded greater normalized bias in feature value change than B-splines registration, though this difference was not significant (p = 0.15). Conclusions: Demons registration provided higher spatial accuracy between matched anatomic landmarks in serial CT scans than rigid, affine, or B-splines algorithms. Texture feature changes calculated in healthy lung tissue from serial CT scans were smaller following demons registration compared with all other algorithms. Though registration altered the values of the majority of texture features, 19 features remained relatively stable after demons registration, indicating their potential for detecting pathologic change in serial CT scans. Combi...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.