Is the Importance of Heart Dose Overstated in the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Tina Wanting Zhang, Jonatan Snir, R. Gabriel Boldt, George B. Rodrigues, Alexander V. Louie, Stewart Gaede, Ronald C. McGarry, James J. Urbanic, Megan E Daly, David A. Palma

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Some recent studies have suggested a relationship between cardiac dose and mortality in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but others have reported conflicting data. The goal of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide an evidence-based estimate of the relationship between cardiac dose and mortality in these patients. Methods and Materials: A systematic review of MEDLINE (PubMed) and Embase databases (inception to January 2018) was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies that evaluated cardiac dosimetric factors in patients with NSCLC and included outcomes of cardiac events, cardiac mortality, and/or overall survival were identified. Results: From 5614 patients across 22 studies, a total of 214 cardiac dosimetric parameters (94 unique) were assessed as possible predictors of cardiac toxicity or death. Assessed predictors included general (eg, mean heart dose [MHD]), threshold-based (eg, heart V5), and anatomic-based (eg, atria, ventricles) dosimetric factors. The most commonly analyzed parameters were MHD, heart V5, and V30. Most studies did not make corrections for multiplicity of testing. For overall survival, V5 was found to be significant on multivariable analysis (MVA) in 1 of 11 studies and V30 in 2 of 12 studies; MHD was not significant in any of 8 studies. For cardiac events, V5 was found to be significant on multivariable analysis in 1 of 2 studies, V30 in 1 of 3 studies, and MHD in 2 of 4 studies. A meta-analysis of the data could not be performed because most negative studies did not report effect estimates. Conclusions: Consistent heart dose-volume parameters associated with overall survival of patients with NSCLC were not identified. Multiplicity of testing is a major issue and likely inflates the overall risk of type I errors in the literature. Future studies should specify predictors a priori, correct for multiplicity of testing, and report effect estimates for nonsignificant variables.

Fingerprint

Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
lungs
cancer
dosage
mortality
Survival
Meta-Analysis
Mortality
Therapeutics
estimates
predictions
Cardiac Volume
PubMed
MEDLINE
death
toxicity
Databases
Guidelines
thresholds

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiation
  • Oncology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

Is the Importance of Heart Dose Overstated in the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer? A Systematic Review of the Literature. / Zhang, Tina Wanting; Snir, Jonatan; Boldt, R. Gabriel; Rodrigues, George B.; Louie, Alexander V.; Gaede, Stewart; McGarry, Ronald C.; Urbanic, James J.; Daly, Megan E; Palma, David A.

In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Zhang, Tina Wanting ; Snir, Jonatan ; Boldt, R. Gabriel ; Rodrigues, George B. ; Louie, Alexander V. ; Gaede, Stewart ; McGarry, Ronald C. ; Urbanic, James J. ; Daly, Megan E ; Palma, David A. / Is the Importance of Heart Dose Overstated in the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer? A Systematic Review of the Literature. In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 2019.
@article{0e54f68a4a714e47b4028eb5d5373a71,
title = "Is the Importance of Heart Dose Overstated in the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer? A Systematic Review of the Literature",
abstract = "Purpose: Some recent studies have suggested a relationship between cardiac dose and mortality in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but others have reported conflicting data. The goal of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide an evidence-based estimate of the relationship between cardiac dose and mortality in these patients. Methods and Materials: A systematic review of MEDLINE (PubMed) and Embase databases (inception to January 2018) was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies that evaluated cardiac dosimetric factors in patients with NSCLC and included outcomes of cardiac events, cardiac mortality, and/or overall survival were identified. Results: From 5614 patients across 22 studies, a total of 214 cardiac dosimetric parameters (94 unique) were assessed as possible predictors of cardiac toxicity or death. Assessed predictors included general (eg, mean heart dose [MHD]), threshold-based (eg, heart V5), and anatomic-based (eg, atria, ventricles) dosimetric factors. The most commonly analyzed parameters were MHD, heart V5, and V30. Most studies did not make corrections for multiplicity of testing. For overall survival, V5 was found to be significant on multivariable analysis (MVA) in 1 of 11 studies and V30 in 2 of 12 studies; MHD was not significant in any of 8 studies. For cardiac events, V5 was found to be significant on multivariable analysis in 1 of 2 studies, V30 in 1 of 3 studies, and MHD in 2 of 4 studies. A meta-analysis of the data could not be performed because most negative studies did not report effect estimates. Conclusions: Consistent heart dose-volume parameters associated with overall survival of patients with NSCLC were not identified. Multiplicity of testing is a major issue and likely inflates the overall risk of type I errors in the literature. Future studies should specify predictors a priori, correct for multiplicity of testing, and report effect estimates for nonsignificant variables.",
author = "Zhang, {Tina Wanting} and Jonatan Snir and Boldt, {R. Gabriel} and Rodrigues, {George B.} and Louie, {Alexander V.} and Stewart Gaede and McGarry, {Ronald C.} and Urbanic, {James J.} and Daly, {Megan E} and Palma, {David A.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.12.044",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics",
issn = "0360-3016",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is the Importance of Heart Dose Overstated in the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer? A Systematic Review of the Literature

AU - Zhang, Tina Wanting

AU - Snir, Jonatan

AU - Boldt, R. Gabriel

AU - Rodrigues, George B.

AU - Louie, Alexander V.

AU - Gaede, Stewart

AU - McGarry, Ronald C.

AU - Urbanic, James J.

AU - Daly, Megan E

AU - Palma, David A.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Purpose: Some recent studies have suggested a relationship between cardiac dose and mortality in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but others have reported conflicting data. The goal of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide an evidence-based estimate of the relationship between cardiac dose and mortality in these patients. Methods and Materials: A systematic review of MEDLINE (PubMed) and Embase databases (inception to January 2018) was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies that evaluated cardiac dosimetric factors in patients with NSCLC and included outcomes of cardiac events, cardiac mortality, and/or overall survival were identified. Results: From 5614 patients across 22 studies, a total of 214 cardiac dosimetric parameters (94 unique) were assessed as possible predictors of cardiac toxicity or death. Assessed predictors included general (eg, mean heart dose [MHD]), threshold-based (eg, heart V5), and anatomic-based (eg, atria, ventricles) dosimetric factors. The most commonly analyzed parameters were MHD, heart V5, and V30. Most studies did not make corrections for multiplicity of testing. For overall survival, V5 was found to be significant on multivariable analysis (MVA) in 1 of 11 studies and V30 in 2 of 12 studies; MHD was not significant in any of 8 studies. For cardiac events, V5 was found to be significant on multivariable analysis in 1 of 2 studies, V30 in 1 of 3 studies, and MHD in 2 of 4 studies. A meta-analysis of the data could not be performed because most negative studies did not report effect estimates. Conclusions: Consistent heart dose-volume parameters associated with overall survival of patients with NSCLC were not identified. Multiplicity of testing is a major issue and likely inflates the overall risk of type I errors in the literature. Future studies should specify predictors a priori, correct for multiplicity of testing, and report effect estimates for nonsignificant variables.

AB - Purpose: Some recent studies have suggested a relationship between cardiac dose and mortality in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but others have reported conflicting data. The goal of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide an evidence-based estimate of the relationship between cardiac dose and mortality in these patients. Methods and Materials: A systematic review of MEDLINE (PubMed) and Embase databases (inception to January 2018) was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies that evaluated cardiac dosimetric factors in patients with NSCLC and included outcomes of cardiac events, cardiac mortality, and/or overall survival were identified. Results: From 5614 patients across 22 studies, a total of 214 cardiac dosimetric parameters (94 unique) were assessed as possible predictors of cardiac toxicity or death. Assessed predictors included general (eg, mean heart dose [MHD]), threshold-based (eg, heart V5), and anatomic-based (eg, atria, ventricles) dosimetric factors. The most commonly analyzed parameters were MHD, heart V5, and V30. Most studies did not make corrections for multiplicity of testing. For overall survival, V5 was found to be significant on multivariable analysis (MVA) in 1 of 11 studies and V30 in 2 of 12 studies; MHD was not significant in any of 8 studies. For cardiac events, V5 was found to be significant on multivariable analysis in 1 of 2 studies, V30 in 1 of 3 studies, and MHD in 2 of 4 studies. A meta-analysis of the data could not be performed because most negative studies did not report effect estimates. Conclusions: Consistent heart dose-volume parameters associated with overall survival of patients with NSCLC were not identified. Multiplicity of testing is a major issue and likely inflates the overall risk of type I errors in the literature. Future studies should specify predictors a priori, correct for multiplicity of testing, and report effect estimates for nonsignificant variables.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061644960&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85061644960&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.12.044

DO - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.12.044

M3 - Article

C2 - 30630029

AN - SCOPUS:85061644960

JO - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

JF - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

SN - 0360-3016

ER -