International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
Clinical InvestigationStereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Patients With Unresectable Primary Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Dose-Volumetric Parameters Predicting the Hepatic Complication
Introduction
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), which is one of the most common malignant carcinomas worldwide, is a fatal disease that might cause death with severe complications if treated improperly 1, 2. The surgical resection has been considered as the choice of treatment for early-stage HCC. However, many patients are either inoperable or unresectable at the time of diagnosis. In the case of inoperable or unresectable HCC, external radiotherapy (RT), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have been used 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
RT has not been widely used for the treatment of HCC because of the low tolerable dose of radiation for the entire liver, which was not effective for the tumor control 8, 9, 10. However, much literature has reported recently that partial volume irradiation of the liver was feasible and that it was a useful tool for the treatment of HCC within an acceptable range of hepatic toxicity 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. In addition, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is now being extended to more patients and clinical targets, and, as a result, several reports have described clinical assessments of the response of HCC to SBRT 16, 17, 18, 19, 20.
Until now, radiation-induced liver disease (RILD) has been considered as a significant limiting factor in the use of RT. Several reports regarding the predicting parameters for RILD have been recently published 21, 22, 23, 24. However, these reports were based on the various definitions of RILD and the clinical data from conventional fractionation. In terms of hypofractionated SBRT, a few reports have been published showing that the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and the mean liver dose were predicting parameters 25, 26. Unfortunately, the NTCP and the value of mean dose are not supported by the CyberKnife planning system.
The purpose of our study is to evaluate the hepatic toxicity and deterioration of the hepatic function in patients with small-sized HCC, who were treated with hypofractionated SBRT, and also to identify the predicting parameters of hepatic toxicity and the deterioration of hepatic function.
Section snippets
Patient characteristics
Between April 2004 and May 2007, 47 patients with small unresectable primary HCC received SBRT using the CyberKnife (Accuray Inc, Sunnycale, CA) at the CyberKnife center, the Catholic University of Korea.
Most patients were treated with a combination therapy of SBRT, TACE, RFA, and PEI. To evaluate the hepatic toxicity and the presence or absence of the deterioration of hepatic function resulting from SBRT, we selected only patients who had not received any treatments influencing hepatic
Progression of hepatic toxicity within 6 month after the completion of SBRT
Of 36 patients analyzed, 7 patients (19%) already had Grade 2 hepatic toxicity before SBRT. Of those 7 patients, 4 (11%) had been treated with other local treatments, whereas other 3 (8%) had not been treated with any local treatments. After SBRT, 14 patients (39%) were noted to have Grade 2 or higher hepatic toxicity. Because we intended to evaluate the hepatic toxicity induced by SBRT, we considered a newly developed or progressed hepatic toxicity to a higher grade as significant adverse
Discussion
The classic RILD is defined as subacute hepatic toxicity presenting with anicteric ascites, hepatomegaly, and elevated alkaline phosphatase (10). Although it has been described to occur as early as 2 weeks and as late as 7 months, it typically occurs 4–8 weeks after the completion of RT (27). There has been no effective treatment for RILD to date, except for conservative management using steroids or diuretics. RILD could cause a liver failure if not treated properly, so, it is most important to
Conclusion
We believe that the presence or absence of progression of CP class could be a dose-limiting factor and suggest that the total liver volume receiving a dose less than 18 Gy (rV18Gy) should be >800 cm3 to reduce the risk of the deterioration of hepatic function. The data of predicting parameters derived from the data from the conventional RT are not appropriate to use for patients treated with hypofractionated RT.
Acknowledgments
The statistical analyses performed in this article were advised by Catholic Medical Center Clinical Research Coordinating Center. We thank to Hyeon-Woo, Yim, M.D., Ph.D., and Seung-Hee, Jeong, M.Ph.
References (30)
- et al.
Radiofrequency ablation improves prognosis compared with ethanol injection for hepatocellular carcinoma < or = 4 cm
Gastroenterol
(2004) - et al.
Hepatic toxicity resulting from cancer treatment
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(1995) - et al.
Local radiotherapy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2005) - et al.
Local radiotherapy with or without transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2000) - et al.
Combined transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and local radiotherapy of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(1999) - et al.
A phase I trial of hepatic arterial bromodeoxyuridine and conformal radiation therapy for patients with primary hepatobiliary cancers or colorectal liver metastases
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(1997) - et al.
Radiation-induced liver disease after three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Dosimetric analysis and implication
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2002) - et al.
Radiotherapeutic parameters predictive of liver complications induced by liver tumor radiotherapy
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2009) - et al.
Dose-volumetric parameters predicting radiation-induced hepatic toxicity in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2007) - et al.
Analysis of radiation-induced liver disease using the Lyman NTCP model
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2002)
Radiation-induced liver disease in three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy for primary liver carcinoma: The risk factors and hepatic radiation tolerance
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
Hepatitis B virus reactivation after three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in patients with hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
Natural history of hepatocellular carcinoma and prognosis in relation to treatment. Study of 850 patients
Cancer
Estimating the world cancer burden: Globocan 2000
Int J Cancer
Transarterial chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Radiology
Cited by (114)
Role of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in Hepatocellular Carcinoma
2024, Surgical Oncology Clinics of North AmericaOrgans at risk radiation dose constraints
2022, Cancer/RadiotherapieStereotactic ablative radiotherapy for colorectal cancer liver metastasis
2021, Seminars in Cancer BiologyHigh Dose per Fraction, Hypofractionated Treatment Effects in the Clinic (HyTEC): An Overview
2021, International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology PhysicsRadiation Dose-Volume Effects for Liver SBRT
2021, International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology PhysicsCitation Excerpt :However, sufficient data were available to analyze 2 toxicities: liver enzyme changes and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. A variety of endpoints have been used in studies, including progression of the Child-Pugh score (12-14, 20, 21), classic and nonclassic radiation-induced liver disease (RILD) (11, 19, 22), liver enzyme changes (defined as elevation in alanine aminotransaminase or aspartate aminotransaminase) (11-14, 20, 21, 23), and/or Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade progression for hepatic, thrombocytopenic, or general GI toxicity. General GI toxicities included fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, gastritis, ulcers, GI area pain, and colitis (9-12, 14, 21-26).
Conflicts of interest: none.