» Articles » PMID: 17362522

A Comparison of Mantle Versus Involved-field Radiotherapy for Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Reduction in Normal Tissue Dose and Second Cancer Risk

Overview
Journal Radiat Oncol
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialties Oncology
Radiology
Date 2007 Mar 17
PMID 17362522
Citations 45
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) survivors who undergo radiotherapy experience increased risks of second cancers (SC) and cardiac sequelae. To reduce such risks, extended-field radiotherapy (RT) for HL has largely been replaced by involved field radiotherapy (IFRT). While it has generally been assumed that IFRT will reduce SC risks, there are few data that quantify the reduction in dose to normal tissues associated with modern RT practice for patients with mediastinal HL, and no estimates of the expected reduction in SC risk.

Methods: Organ-specific dose-volume histograms (DVH) were generated for 41 patients receiving 35 Gy mantle RT, 35 Gy IFRT, or 20 Gy IFRT, and integrated organ mean doses were compared for the three protocols. Organ-specific SC risk estimates were estimated using a dosimetric risk-modeling approach, analyzing DVH data with quantitative, mechanistic models of radiation-induced cancer.

Results: Dose reductions resulted in corresponding reductions in predicted excess relative risks (ERR) for SC induction. Moving from 35 Gy mantle RT to 35 Gy IFRT reduces predicted ERR for female breast and lung cancer by approximately 65%, and for male lung cancer by approximately 35%; moving from 35 Gy IFRT to 20 Gy IFRT reduces predicted ERRs approximately 40% more. The median reduction in integral dose to the whole heart with the transition to 35 Gy IFRT was 35%, with a smaller (2%) reduction in dose to proximal coronary arteries. There was no significant reduction in thyroid dose.

Conclusion: The significant decreases estimated for radiation-induced SC risks associated with modern IFRT provide strong support for the use of IFRT to reduce the late effects of treatment. The approach employed here can provide new insight into the risks associated with contemporary IFRT for HL, and may facilitate the counseling of patients regarding the risks associated with this treatment.

Citing Articles

CT, MRI, and FDG PET/CT in the Assessment of Lymph Node Involvement in Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma: An Expert Consensus Definition by an International Collaboration on Staging Evaluation and Response Criteria Harmonization for Children, Adolescent,....

Stoevesandt D, Steglich J, Bartelt J, Kurch L, McCarten K, Flerlage J Radiology. 2025; 314(1):e232650.

PMID: 39835977 PMC: 11783165. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.232650.


Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Patients With Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma: A Danish Nationwide Register-Based Cohort Study.

Godtfredsen S, Yonis H, Baech J, Al-Hussainy N, Riddersholm S, Kober L Eur J Haematol. 2024; 114(2):343-352.

PMID: 39501912 PMC: 11707824. DOI: 10.1111/ejh.14334.


Consequences of ionizing radiation exposure to the cardiovascular system.

Jahng J, Little M, No H, Loo Jr B, Wu J Nat Rev Cardiol. 2024; 21(12):880-898.

PMID: 38987578 DOI: 10.1038/s41569-024-01056-4.


Radiotherapy dose de-escalation in patients with high grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma in a real-world clinical practice.

Yadav B, Dey T Radiat Oncol J. 2024; 41(4):237-247.

PMID: 38185928 PMC: 10772589. DOI: 10.3857/roj.2023.00339.


Impact of Modern Low Dose Involved Site Radiation Therapy on Normal Tissue Toxicity in Cervicothoracic Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas: A Biophysical Study.

Roers J, Rolf D, Baehr A, Pottgen C, Stickan-Verfurth M, Siats J Cancers (Basel). 2023; 15(24).

PMID: 38136257 PMC: 10741516. DOI: 10.3390/cancers15245712.


References
1.
Glanzmann C, Kaufmann P, Jenni R, Hess O, Huguenin P . Cardiac risk after mediastinal irradiation for Hodgkin's disease. Radiother Oncol. 1998; 46(1):51-62. DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8140(97)00125-4. View

2.
Hughes D, Smith A, Hoppe R, Owen J, Hanlon A, Wallace M . Treatment planning for Hodgkin's disease: a patterns of care study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995; 33(2):519-24. DOI: 10.1016/0360-3016(94)00605-K. View

3.
Hoskin P, Smith P, Maughan T, Gilson D, Vernon C, Syndikus I . Long-term results of a randomised trial of involved field radiotherapy vs extended field radiotherapy in stage I and II Hodgkin lymphoma. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2005; 17(1):47-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2004.07.004. View

4.
Sachs R, Brenner D . Solid tumor risks after high doses of ionizing radiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005; 102(37):13040-5. PMC: 1199000. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0506648102. View

5.
Travis L, Hill D, Dores G, Gospodarowicz M, van Leeuwen F, Holowaty E . Cumulative absolute breast cancer risk for young women treated for Hodgkin lymphoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005; 97(19):1428-37. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dji290. View