Open Access

Dosimetric parameter predicting the deterioration of hepatic function after helical tomotherapy in patients with unresectable locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

  • Seok Hyun Son1,
  • Chul Seung Kay1,
  • Jin Ho Song1,
  • Sea-Won Lee1,
  • Byung Ock Choi1,
  • Young Nam Kang1,
  • Jeong Won Jang2,
  • Seung Kew Yoon2 and
  • Hong Seok Jang1Email author
Radiation Oncology20138:11

DOI: 10.1186/1748-717X-8-11

Received: 1 July 2012

Accepted: 5 January 2013

Published: 9 January 2013

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study was to identify parameters capable of predicting the deterioration of hepatic function after helical tomotherapy in patients with unresectable locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Methods

Between March 2006 and February 2012, 72 patients were eligible for this study. All patients received hypofractionated radiotherapy using the TomoTherapy Hi-Art (TomoTherapy, Madison, WI, USA) at Seoul St. Mary's Hospital and Incheon St. Mary's Hospital, the Catholic University of Korea. The radiation dose was a median 50 Gy (range: 40–50 Gy) in 10 fractions to 95% of the planning target volume. Radiation-induced hepatic toxicity was defined as an increase of at least 2 points in the Child-Pugh (CP) score within 3 months after completion of helical tomotherapy.

Results

An increase of at least 2 points in the CP score occurred in 32 of the 72 patients (44.4%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that pretreatment CP class and V15Gy were significant parameters associated with an increase in CP score (p = 0.009 and p < 0.001, respectively). The area under receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.863 for V15Gy (p < 0.001). For V15Gy, with a cutoff value of 43.2%, the accuracy was 0.806 (58/72) with a sensitivity of 0.938 and a specificity of 0.725.

Conclusions

An increase of at least 2 points in the CP score is a radiation dose-limiting factor, and the non-target normal liver receiving a dose more than 15 Gy (V15Gy) should be <43.2% to reduce the risk of the deterioration of hepatic function.

Keywords

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) Helical tomotherapy Radiation-induced hepatic toxicity (RIHT) Child-Pugh score (CP score) Dosimetric parameter The deterioration of hepatic function

Background

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), which is one of the most common malignant carcinomas worldwide, is a fatal disease that might cause death with severe complication if treated improperly [1, 2]. Although a surgical resection is considered the treatment of choice, many patients are either inoperable or the tumor is unresectable at the time of diagnosis. In these cases, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have been used [35]. In contrast, radiotherapy (RT) had not been widely used for the treatment of HCC because of the low dose of radiation tolerable for the entire liver, which was not effective for tumor control [6, 7]. However, recently reported studies showed that partial volume irradiation of the liver is feasible and a useful tool for the treatment of HCC within an acceptable range of hepatic toxicity [811].

In the use of RT for the treatment of HCC, radiation-induced hepatic toxicity (RIHT) is considered a significant dose-limiting factor because of its potential to cause liver failure. This potential underlines the importance of identifying a parameter that can predict, and thus, prevent RIHT. To date, several reports investigating parameters capable of predicting RIHT have been recently published [1217]; however, these reports are based on clinical data from 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT). When compared with 3D-CRT, helical tomotherapy is an advanced technique that can provide a high dose of radiation to the target volume, while reducing the dose to the surrounding normal tissues. But, low to moderate dose of radiation distributed to a much wider region of the normal liver could affect the incidence of RIHT.

Here, we evaluated RIHT reflecting the deterioration of hepatic function in advanced HCC patients treated with helical tomotherapy and identified a parameter capable of predicting RIHT.

Methods

Patients

The inclusion criteria for this study were as follows: 1) unresectable locally advanced HCC, 2) prior treatment by hypofractionated helical tomotherapy with a curative aim, 3) a radiation dose of 40–50 Gy in 10 fractions, 4) 2 or more laboratory studies within 3 months after the completion of helical tomotherapy, 5) 1 or more radiologic studies within 3 months after the completion of helical tomotherapy, and 6) no intrahepatic disease progression within 3 months after the completion of helical tomotherapy.

Between March 2006 and February 2012, 72 patients were eligible for this study. All the patients received hypofractionated RT using the TomoTherapy Hi-Art (TomoTherapy, Madison, WI, USA) at Seoul St. Mary's Hospital and Incheon St. Mary's Hospital, the Catholic University of Korea. The patients' clinical and dosimetric data were retrospectively collected following Institutional Review Board approval. The patients' characteristics are shown in Table 1.
Table 1

Patient’s characteristics

Characteristic

n

(%)

Gender

  

  Male

54

75.0

  Female

18

25.0

Age (year)

  

  Median

60

 

  Range

21-80

 

ECOG PS

  

  0

23

31.9

  1

49

68.1

Hepatitis

  

  No

2

2.8

  Yes

70

97.2

    HBV

52

72.2

    HCV

6

8.3

    Others

12

16.7

Liver cirrhosis

  

  No

16

22.2

  Yes

56

77.8

PVTT

  

  No

30

41.7

  Yes

42

58.3

AFP (IU/mL)

  

  <400

48

66.7

  ≥400

24

33.3

Child-Pugh class

  

  A

54

75.0

  B

18

25.0

AJCC stage

  

  II

12

16.7

  III

53

73.6

  IVA

7

9.7

Previous treatment

  

  No

7

9.7

  Yes

65

90.3

    TACE

63

87.5

    RFA

7

9.7

    PEI

7

9.7

    Surgery

9

12.5

Treatment after RT

  

  No

31

43.1

  Yes

41

56.9

    TACE

40

55.6

    RFA

2

2.8

    PEI

2

2.8

    Systemic CTx

3

4.2

Radiation dose

  

  40 Gy/10 fxs

6

8.3

  45 Gy/10 fxs

10

13.9

  50 Gy/10 fxs

56

77.8

Abbreviations: ECOG PS Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; HBV hepatitis B virus; HCV hepatitis C virus; PVTT portal vein tumor thrombosis; AFP alpha-fetoprotein; AJCC American Joint Committee on Cancer; TACE transcatheter arterial chemoembolization; RFA radiofrequency ablation; PEI percutaneous ethanol injection; RT radiotherapy; CTx chemotherapy; fxs fractions.

Prior to helical tomotherapy, 65 patients (90.3%) were treated with other locoregional treatments such as TACE, RFA, PEI, and surgery. Within 3 months after the completion of helical tomotherapy, TACE was performed in 41 patients (56.9%) (median: 1 time, average: 1.5 times, range: 1–3 times). In addition, RFA and PEI were performed in 2 patients each (2.8%) and systemic chemotherapy was performed in 3 patients (4.2%).

Target volume and treatment

The gross tumor volume (GTV) was defined as the tumor volume that was enhanced in the arterial phase and diluted in the delayed phase of computed tomography (CT) scan. The planning target volume (PTV) was generated by adding 5–15 mm to the GTV in 52 of the 72 patients, facilitating asymmetric margin expansion to reduce irradiation to the stomach, duodenum, and small intestine. In the remaining 20 of 72 patients, 4-dimensional CT (4D-CT) was performed to generate the internal target volume to compensate for respiratory-induced liver movement because of the installation of 4D-CT in March 2009 at Seoul St. Mary’s hospital and in March 2011 at Incheon St. Mary’s hospital. Organs at risks such as the total liver, non-target normal liver (NTNL), stomach, duodenum, intestine, kidney, and spinal cord were also contoured for evaluation of the irradiated dose. NTNL volume was the total liver volume minus PTV.

The prescribed radiation dose was a median 50 Gy (range: 40–50 Gy) in 10 fractions to 95% of the PTV. Prior to the actual beam delivery, megavoltage cone-beam CT was performed at the time of every treatment session. Each patient’s set-up and position were corrected with automated image registration, and the anatomical accuracy was always evaluated by a radiation oncologist.

Evaluation of the radiation-induced hepatic toxicity

RIHT was defined as an increase of at least 2 points in the Child-Pugh (CP) score within 3 months after the completion of helical tomotherapy. CP score, which is calculated on the basis of the serum bilirubin and albumin levels, prothrombin time (PT), and the presence and degree of ascites or encephalopathy, is an assessment of the severity of hepatic function. Thus, an increase in CP score reflects the deterioration of hepatic function [18].

During helical tomotherapy, patients were seen weekly by a physician to evaluate their complaints. After completion of helical tomotherapy, patients were followed-up every 1–2 months. At every visit, physical examinations and blood tests were performed to assess hepatic toxicity. Levels of aspartate transaminase (AST), alanine transaminase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), serum albumin, total bilirubin and PT were examined. Ascites and hepatic encephalopathy were also evaluated.

Parameters for predicting RIHT

The clinical parameters analyzed were gender, age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, pretreatment CP class, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, pretreatment level of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and the presence or absence of hepatitis, liver cirrhosis, portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) and previous treatments.

The dosimetric parameters analyzed were PTV, mean dose of NTNL, the percentage of NTNL volume receiving >5 Gy (V5Gy), >10 Gy (V10Gy), >15 Gy (V15Gy), >20 Gy (V20Gy), >25 Gy (V25Gy), >30 Gy (V30Gy), >35 Gy (V35Gy), and >40 Gy (V40Gy).

Statistical analyses

Pearson's chi-square and the independent t-test were used for univariate analysis of the clinical parameters associated with RIHT. Binary logistic regression analysis was used for univariate analysis of dosimetric parameters associated with RIHT. Multivariate analysis was performed using the logistic regression model containing all significant variables according to univariate analysis (selection: stepwise forward). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to estimate the significant dosimetric parameters. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS ver. 12.0 (SPSS Institute, Chicago, Illinois) and a p value of <0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Clinical and dosimetric parameters associated with an increase in CP score

An increase of at least 2 points in the CP score occurred in 32 of 72 patients (44.4%) within 3 months after completion of helical tomotherapy. Univariate analysis results showing the associations between clinical parameters and the increased the CP score are summarized in Table 2. Age, gender, pretreatment level of AFP, and the presence of hepatitis and/or liver cirrhosis did not contribute to an increase in CP score after helical tomotherapy. In addition, previous treatments and treatments given after completion of helical tomotherapy did not contribute to an increase in CP score (p = 0.374 and 0.394, respectively). In contrast, AJCC stage, the presence of PVTT, and pretreatment CP class were significantly associated with an increase in the CP score after helical tomotherapy (p = 0.021, 0.037, and 0.006, respectively).
Table 2

Clinical parameters in patients with or without an increase in Child-Pugh score ≥ 2

 

Without (n = 40)

With (n = 32)

pvalue

Gender

  

0.584

   Male

31

23

   Female

9

9

Age (years)

  

0.231

   median

62

59

   range

21-80

41-80

ECOG PS

  

0.910

   0

13

10

   1

27

22

Hepatitis

  

0.109

   No

0

2

   Yes

40

30

AFP (IU/mL)

  

0.094

   <400

30

18

   ≥400

10

14

LC

  

0.228

   No

11

5

   Yes

29

27

PVTT

  

*0.037

   No

21

9

   Yes

19

23

CP class

  

*0.006

   A

35

19

   B

5

13

AJCC stage

  

*0.021

   II

11

1

   III

26

27

   IVA

3

4

Previous treatment

  

0.374

   No

5

2

   Yes

35

30

Treatment after RT

  

0.394

   No

19

12

   Yes

21

20

Abbreviations: ECOG PS Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; AFP alpha-fetoprotein; LC liver cirrhosis; PVTT portal vein tumor thrombosis; CP class Child-Pugh class; AJCC American Joint Committee on Cancer; RT radiotherapy.

*Significant parameters in univariate analysis.

Univariate analysis of the associations between the dosimetric parameters and the increase in CP score showed that PTV, mean dose of NTNL, V5Gy, V10Gy, V15Gy, V20Gy, V25Gy, V30Gy and V35Gy were significantly associated with an increase in the CP score (Table 3).
Table 3

Dosimetric parameters in patients with or without an increase in Child-Pugh score ≥ 2

Parameters

Without (n = 40)

With (n = 32)

pvalue (95%CI)

ROC curve

AUC

pvalue

PTV (cm3)

103.8 ± 102.8

227.1 ± 193.5

0.004 (1.002-1.011)

0.741

<0.001

Mean dose of NTNL (Gy)

14.9 ± 4.1

20.2 ± 3.2

<0.001 (1.209-1.708)

0.839

<0.001

V5Gy

76.6 ± 17.5

91.2 ± 7.6

0.001 (1.040-1.153)

0.765

<0.001

V10Gy

57.1 ± 19.1

79.2 ± 10.7

<0.001 (1.048-1.140)

0.830

<0.001

*V15Gy

39.2 ± 14.8

61.3 ± 11.9

<0.001 (1.064-1.180)

0.863

<0.001

V20Gy

27.1 ± 11.0

44.0 ± 11.8

<0.001 (1.069-1.199)

0.852

<0.001

V25Gy

19.4 ± 8.6

30.5 ± 10.1

<0.001 (1.062-1.204)

0.804

<0.001

V30Gy

14.8 ± 7.6

21.6 ± 8.3

0.002 (1.040-1.187)

0.738

0.001

V35Gy

10.5 ± 6.2

15.4 ± 7.1

0.006 (1.033-1.205)

0.706

0.003

V40Gy

7.2 ± 5.1

9.9 ± 5.1

0.053 (0.999-1.190)

-

-

Abbreviations: CI confidence interval; ROC receiver operating characteristic; AUC area under curve; PTV planning target volume; NTNL non-target normal liver.

*Significant parameter on multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Multivariate logistic regression analysis confirmed that pretreatment CP class and V15Gy were significant parameters associated with an increase in the CP score (p = 0.009 and p < 0.001, respectively). As shown in Figure 1, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.863 for V15Gy (p < 0.001), indicating that V15Gy with a cutoff value of 43.2% was an appropriate value to predict an increase in the CP score. An increase in the CP score was observed in 2 of 30 patients (6.7%) with a V15Gy of ≤43.2% and in 30 of 43 patients (69.8%) with a V15Gy of >43.2%. For V15Gy, with a cutoff value of 43.2%, the accuracy was 0.806 (58/72) with a sensitivity of 0.938 and a specificity of 0.725.
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1748-717X-8-11/MediaObjects/13014_2012_Article_728_Fig1_HTML.jpg
Figure 1

Receiver operating characteristic curve for V 15Gy .

Normal liver dose-volume histogram (DVH) reflecting the risk of the deterioration of hepatic function

Close correlations were demonstrated between dosimetric parameters that were shown to be significant in the univariate analysis (V5Gy vs. V10Gy, r = 0.890, p < 0.001; V10Gy vs. V15Gy, r = 0.936, p < 0.001; V15Gy vs. V20Gy, r = 0.945, p < 0.001; V20Gy vs. V25Gy, r = 0.962, p < 0.001; V25Gy vs. V30Gy, r = 0.916, p < 0.001; V30Gy vs. V35Gy, r = 0.904, p < 0.001). Although V15Gy was the only significant dosimetric parameter found in multivariate analysis, other parameters (V5Gy, V10Gy, V20Gy, V25Gy, V30Gy and V35Gy) that were shown to be statistically significant in univariate analysis also demonstrated similar relationship patterns in their estimated probability curves (Figure 2). Additionally, the area under the ROC curve of each of these parameters was regarded as a good value with statistical significance (Table 3). From these curves, the values indicating a 10%, 20% and 30% risk of an increase in the CP score were obtained. These values correspond to the normal liver DVH reflecting the risk of the deterioration of hepatic function. It could provide a treatment planning guideline to reduce the risk of developing the deterioration of hepatic function (Figure 3).
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1748-717X-8-11/MediaObjects/13014_2012_Article_728_Fig2_HTML.jpg
Figure 2

The estimated probability of an increase in CP score for V 5Gy, V 10Gy, V 15Gy, V 20Gy, V 25Gy, V 30Gy, and V 35Gy .

https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1748-717X-8-11/MediaObjects/13014_2012_Article_728_Fig3_HTML.jpg
Figure 3

The normal liver dose-volume histogram indicating a 10%, 20%, and 30% risk of an increase in CP score.

Discussion

Ablation, chemoembolization, and RT have been used for the treatment of unresectable locally advanced HCC. Because RT alone cannot achieve a complete response in most cases, other locoregional treatments, such as TACE, RFA, and PEI, have been used repeatedly prior to or after RT. After completion of RT, transient elevation of hepatic enzymes such as AST, ALT, and ALP commonly occurs, but, in many cases, these kinds of hepatic toxicities are recovered in a few months [14]. However, if hepatic function deteriorates because of radiation, other necessary treatments cannot be performed in a timely manner. Since no specific treatment for this condition exists except conservative care, it is also important to reduce the development of the deterioration of hepatic function. Thus, it is important to identify a parameter that can predict the deterioration of hepatic function and to develop a plan for RT using the parameter and its values.

The relationship between the radiation dose to liver volume and the incidence of hepatic toxicities has been studied previously [1215, 17]. Radiation-induced liver disease (RILD) is a traditionally accepted concept of hepatic toxicity [7]. In the past, classic RILD was a serious manifestation of hepatic toxicity caused by irradiation of 30–35 Gy to the entire liver. However, the incidence of classic RILD has been lowered, since partial volume irradiation has become more common. Other authors have reported the parameters predicting the non-classic RILD or the elevation of hepatic enzymes ≥ grade 2 or 3 according to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity criteria or Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) and their cut-off values to present a guideline for radiation planning [12, 14, 15, 17].

Our study differs from previous studies in 3 aspects. First, the presence or absence of an increase of at least 2 points in the CP score as an end-point of RIHT was used for analysis. A few authors have analyzed the elevation of hepatic enzymes (AST, ALT and ALP) as end points to find significant parameters that predict hepatic toxicities [1215, 17]. Kim et al. showed that the elevation of hepatic enzymes was transient and recovered within a median of 2 months after the completion of RT [14]. However, Furuse et al. showed that hypoalbuminemia, hyperbilirubinemia and ascites were important adverse hepatic events that occur after the application of RT to treat advanced HCC, and these events seriously affected survival [19]. An albumin, bilirubin and ascites were used to calculate the CP score. In our previous study, the progression of CP class was analyzed as a useful radiation dose-limiting factor predicting the deterioration of hepatic function, whereas the elevation of hepatic enzymes according to the CTCAE scale was inappropriate as a useful end point [20]. Liaw et al. also used an increase of at least 2 points in the CP score to evaluate the deterioration of hepatic function in patients who were treated with lamivudine [18]. Therefore, the CP score is appropriate for the assessment of hepatic function, and an increase of at least 2 points in the CP score should be considered the dose-limiting factor.

Another difference between our study and previous studies is that only patients treated with helical tomotherapy were included in the present study. Previous studies regarding the dosimetric parameters predicting hepatic toxicity were based on the data from 3D-CRT. The planning and delivery method of helical tomotherapy is different from that of 3D-CRT. Because helical tomotherapy is delivered continuously from all angles around the patient via a ring gantry, in which the linear accelerator is mounted, a low to moderate radiation dose is delivered to a much wider region of liver. Because of this characteristic, the parameter and its cut-off value could be different between 3D-CRT and helical tomotherapy. According to Kim et al., V30 was demonstrated as a significant parameter in patients treated with conventional fractionated RT [14], and according to Liang et al., V20 was a significant parameter in patients treated with hypofractionated RT (4–6 Gy per fraction) [16]. In our study, a significant parameter is V15Gy, which is a parameter that corresponds to lower doses than those of above studies. The cut-off value of 43.2% for V15Gy in our study is lower than that in the above studies (60% for V30 in the study of Kim et al. and 48.5% for V20 in the study of Ling et al.). This result is probably because of the characteristic planning and delivery method of helical tomotherapy and indicates that, to reduce the risk of the deterioration of hepatic function, a wider region of normal liver should be preserved from a low to moderate dose of radiation.

The third differences between our study and previous studies is that V15Gy was confirmed the only significant dosimetric parameter in multivariate analysis. However, because of the significant correlations between dosimetric parameters shown in univariate analysis, consideration of the values of these parameters could be helpful in the treatment planning phase. Based on the estimated probability curves of V5Gy, V10Gy, V15Gy, V20Gy, V25Gy, V30Gy, and V35Gy, which were statistically significant in univariate logistic and ROC curve analyses, we presented the normal liver DVH indicating a 10%, 20%, and 30% risk of the deterioration of hepatic function (Figure 3). This curve could be used as a reference tolerance curve to evaluate treatment plans.

In conclusion, an increase of at least 2 points in the CP score is a radiation dose-limiting factor, and the non-target normal liver receiving a dose more than 15 Gy (V15Gy) should be <43.2% to reduce the risk of the deterioration of hepatic function. Moreover, the proposed normal liver DVH could be useful as a reference curve to evaluate the dose to the liver.

Abbreviations

CP score: 

Child-Pugh score

HCC: 

Hepatocellular carcinoma

RIHT: 

Radiation-induced hepatic toxicity

TACE: 

Transarterial chemoembolization

PEI: 

Percutaneous ethanol injection

RFA: 

Radiofrequency ablation

RT: 

Radiotherapy

3D-CRT: 

3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy

GTV: 

Gross tumor volume

PTV: 

Planning target volume

NTNL: 

Non-target normal liver

PT: 

Prothrombin time

AST: 

Aspartate transaminase

ALT: 

Alanine transaminase

ALP: 

Alkaline phosphatase

ECOG: 

Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

AJCC: 

American Joint Committee on Cancer

AFP: 

Alpha-fetoprotein

PVTT: 

Portal vein tumor thrombosis

ROC: 

Receiver operating characteristic

DVH: 

Dose-volume histogram

RILD: 

Radiation-induced liver disease

CTCAE: 

Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events

LC: 

Liver cirrhosis

CTx: 

Chemotherapy

fxs: 

Fractions

CI: 

Confidence interval

AUC: 

Area under curve.

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Radiation Oncology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea
(2)
Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea

References

  1. Okuda K, Ohtsuki T, Obata H, Tomimatsu M, Okazaki N, Hasegawa H, Nakajima Y, Ohnishi K: Natural history of hepatocellular carcinoma and prognosis in relation to treatment. Study of 850 patients. Cancer. 1985, 56 (4): 918-928. 10.1002/1097-0142(19850815)56:4<918::AID-CNCR2820560437>3.0.CO;2-E.View ArticlePubMed
  2. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P: Estimating the world cancer burden: Globocan 2000. Int J Cancer. 2001, 94 (2): 153-156. 10.1002/ijc.1440.View ArticlePubMed
  3. Camma C, Schepis F, Orlando A, Albanese M, Shahied L, Trevisani F, Andreone P, Craxi A, Cottone M: Transarterial chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Radiology. 2002, 224 (1): 47-54. 10.1148/radiol.2241011262.View ArticlePubMed
  4. Lencioni R, Pinto F, Armillotta N, Bassi AM, Moretti M, Di Giulio M, Marchi S, Uliana M, Della Capanna S, Lencioni M, et al: Long-term results of percutaneous ethanol injection therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: a European experience. Eur Radiol. 1997, 7 (4): 514-519. 10.1007/s003300050194.View ArticlePubMed
  5. Solbiati L, Livraghi T, Goldberg SN, Ierace T, Meloni F, Dellanoce M, Cova L, Halpern EF, Gazelle GS: Percutaneous radio-frequency ablation of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: long-term results in 117 patients. Radiology. 2001, 221 (1): 159-166. 10.1148/radiol.2211001624.View ArticlePubMed
  6. Cochrane AM, Murray-Lyon IM, Brinkley DM, Williams R: Quadruple chemotherapy versus radiotherapy in treatment of primary hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer. 1977, 40 (2): 609-614. 10.1002/1097-0142(197708)40:2<609::AID-CNCR2820400203>3.0.CO;2-L.View ArticlePubMed
  7. Lawrence TS, Robertson JM, Anscher MS, Jirtle RL, Ensminger WD, Fajardo LF: Hepatic toxicity resulting from cancer treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995, 31 (5): 1237-1248. 10.1016/0360-3016(94)00418-K.View ArticlePubMed
  8. Cheng JC, Chuang VP, Cheng SH, Huang AT, Lin YM, Cheng TI, Yang PS, You DL, Jian JJ, Tsai SY, et al: Local radiotherapy with or without transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000, 47 (2): 435-442. 10.1016/S0360-3016(00)00462-4.View ArticlePubMed
  9. Park W, Lim DH, Paik SW, Koh KC, Choi MS, Park CK, Yoo BC, Lee JE, Kang MK, Park YJ, et al: Local radiotherapy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005, 61 (4): 1143-1150. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.08.028.View ArticlePubMed
  10. Robertson JM, McGinn CJ, Walker S, Marx MV, Kessler ML, Ensminger WD, Lawrence TS: 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, 39 (5): 1087-1092. 10.1016/S0360-3016(97)00550-6.View ArticlePubMed
  11. Seong J, Keum KC, Han KH, Lee DY, Lee JT, Chon CY, Moon YM, Suh CO, Kim GE: Combined transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and local radiotherapy of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999, 43 (2): 393-397. 10.1016/S0360-3016(98)00415-5.View ArticlePubMed
  12. Cheng JC, Wu JK, Huang CM, Liu HS, Huang DY, Cheng SH, Tsai SY, Jian JJ, Lin YM, Cheng TI, 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, 54 (1): 156-162. 10.1016/S0360-3016(02)02915-2.View ArticlePubMed
  13. Dawson LA, Normolle D, Balter JM, McGinn CJ, Lawrence TS, Ten Haken RK: Analysis of radiation-induced liver disease using the Lyman NTCP model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002, 53 (4): 810-821. 10.1016/S0360-3016(02)02846-8.View ArticlePubMed
  14. Kim TH, Kim DY, Park JW, Kim SH, Choi JI, Kim HB, Lee WJ, Park SJ, Hong EK, Kim CM: 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, 67 (1): 225-231. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.08.015.View ArticlePubMed
  15. Lee IJ, Seong J, Shim SJ, Han KH: Radiotherapeutic parameters predictive of liver complications induced by liver tumor radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009, 73 (1): 154-158. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.04.035.View ArticlePubMed
  16. Liang S, Huang X, Zhu X, Zhang W, Cai L, Huang H, Li Y, Chen L, Liu M: Dosimetric predictor identification for radiation-induced liver disease after hypofractionated conformal radiotherapy for primary liver carcinoma patients with Child-Pugh Grade A cirrhosis. Radiother Oncol. 2011, 98 (2): 265-269. 10.1016/j.radonc.2010.10.014.View ArticlePubMed
  17. Liang SX, Zhu XD, Xu ZY, Zhu J, Zhao JD, Lu HJ, Yang YL, Chen L, Wang AY, Fu XL, et al: 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. 2006, 65 (2): 426-434. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.12.031.View ArticlePubMed
  18. Liaw Y, Sung JJ, Chow WC, Farrell G, Lee C, Yuen H, Tanwandee T, Tao Q, Shue K, Keene ON, et al: Lamivudine for patients with chronic hepatitis B and advanced liver disease. N Engl J Med. 2004, 351 (15): 1521-1531. 10.1056/NEJMoa033364.View ArticlePubMed
  19. Furuse J, Ishii H, Nagase M, Kawashima M, Ogino T, Yoshino M: Adverse hepatic events caused by radiotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005, 20 (10): 1512-1518. 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2005.03916.x.View ArticlePubMed
  20. Son SH, Choi BO, Ryu MR, Kang YN, Jang JS, Bae SH, Yoon SK, Choi IB, Kang KM, Jang HS: Stereotactic body radiotherapy for patients with unresectable primary hepatocellular carcinoma: dose-volumetric parameters predicting the hepatic complication. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010, 78 (4): 1073-1080. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.09.009.View ArticlePubMed

Copyright

© Son et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement