Predicting radiation‐induced immune suppression in lung cancer patients treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy

Jonathan Colen,Cam Nguyen,Seth W. Liyanage,Eric Aliotta,Joe Chen,Clayton Alonso,Kara Romano,Sean Peach,Timothy Showalter,Paul Read,James Larner,Krishni Wijesooriya
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.17181
IF: 4.506
2024-06-05
Medical Physics
Abstract:Background Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is known to modulate the immune system and contribute to the generation of anti‐tumor T cells and stimulate T cell infiltration into tumors. Radiation‐induced immune suppression (RIIS) is a side effect of radiation therapy that can decrease immunological function by killing naive T cells as well as SBRT‐induced newly created effector T cells, suppressing the immune response to tumors and increasing susceptibility to infections. Purpose RIIS varies substantially among patients and it is currently unclear what drives this variability. Models that can accurately predict RIIS in near real time based on treatment plan characteristics would allow treatment planners to maintain current protocol specific dosimetric criteria while minimizing immune suppression. In this paper, we present an algorithm to predict RIIS based on a model of circulating blood using early stage lung cancer patients treated with SBRT. Methods This Python‐based algorithm uses DICOM data for radiation therapy treatment plans, dose maps, patient CT data sets, and organ delineations to stochastically simulate blood flow and predict the doses absorbed by circulating lymphocytes. These absorbed doses are used to predict the fraction of lymphocytes killed by a given treatment plan. Finally, the time dependence of absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) following SBRT is modeled using longitudinal blood data up to a year after treatment. This model was developed and evaluated on a cohort of 64 patients with 10‐fold cross validation. Results Our algorithm predicted post‐treatment ALC with an average error of 0.24±0.21×109 cells/L with 89% of the patients having a prediction error below 0.5 × 109 cells/L. The accuracy was consistent across a wide range of clinical and treatment variables. Our model is able to predict post‐treatment ALC
radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging
What problem does this paper attempt to address?