Tumour and normal tissue radiosensitivity.

The place of personalized treatments is highly increasing in medical and radiation oncology. During the last decades, a huge number of assays have been developed to predict responses of normal tissues and tumours. These tests have not yet been included into daily clinical practice but the recent developments of radiation oncology are paving the way of personalized strategies including the risk of tumour recurrence and normal tissue reactions. Concerning tumor radiosensitivity prediction, no test are currently used, even if the radiosensitivity index and the genome-based model for adjusting radiotherapy dose assays seem the most promising with level II of evidence. Commercial developments are under progress. Concerning normal tissue radiosensitivity prediction, single nucleotide polymorphims of prostate cancer patients and radiation-induced CD8 T-lymphocyte apoptosis breast and prostate assays are of level I of evidence. They can be proposed before the beginning of radiotherapy in order to propose personalized treatments according to both risks of tumour and normal tissue radiosensitivity. Commercial developments are also under way.

[Predictive assays for responses of tumors and normal tissues in radiation oncology]. / Outils pour la prédiction de la réponse tumorale et des tissus sains en oncologie radiothérapie.

The impact of curative radiotherapy depends mainly on the total dose delivered homogenously in the target volume. Tumor sensitivity to radiotherapy may be particularly inconstant depending on location, histology, somatic genetic parameters and the capacity of the immune system to infiltrate the tumor. In addition, the dose delivered to the surrounding healthy tissues may reduce the therapeutic ratio of many radiation treatments. In a same population treated in one center with the same technique, it appears that individual radiosensitivity clearly exists, namely in terms of late side effects that are in principle non-reversible. This review details the different radiobiological approaches that have been developed to better predict the tumor response but also the radiation-induced late effects.

[Individual modification of the dose, volume and fractionation of breast radiotherapy]. / Personnalisation de la dose, du volume et du fractionnement de la radiothérapie du sein.

Randomized trials demonstrated similar overall survival between mastectomy and breast-conservative surgery followed by adjuvant radiation therapy. Breast-conservative surgery, with adjuvant radiation therapy, with or without neoadjuvant systemic therapy has become the standard of care for women with early or locally advanced breast cancer. Nevertheless, certain cardiac, lung or cutaneous toxicities may alter the long-term body image and the quality of life of a limited number of patients who consider having had "overtreatment" or treatment outside the best knowledge of science. In case of low-risk breast cancer, several trials have evaluated the carcinologic outcome in absence of radiation therapy after breast-conservative surgery. Local recurrences increased in case of breast-conservative surgery alone but without impact on overall survival. Multiple debates have emerged in order to select the most appropriate evaluation criteria. Finally, a large consensus has considered that reducing local recurrences is important but with modern technologies and after identifying patients of individual radiosensitivity. Indeed, in case of a low absolute risk of local recurrence, radiation therapy techniques have been developed to allow a focal treatment especially for patients with high risk of developing late effects. This kind of compromise takes into account the reduction risk of local recurrences but also the probability of developing radiation-induced cutaneous sequelae. In the same way, for patients considered at high risk of recurrence, the huge volumes need specific techniques to better cover the targets while protecting the surrounding critic organs such as heart and lung. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy and the local high boost may help to decrease local recurrences of these more extended and aggressive diseases while considering the individual radiosensitivity that paves the way of long-term sequelae. In this article, we detail a personalized approach of breast radiation therapy considering the absolute risk of local recurrences and the probability of radiation-induced toxicity appearance.

[Radiomics: Definition and clinical development]. / Définition et applications cliniques des radiomics.

The ultimate goal in radiation oncology is to offer a personalized treatment to all patients indicated for radiotherapy. Radiomics is a tool that reinforces a deep analysis of tumors at the molecular aspect taking into account intrinsic susceptibility in a long-term follow-up. Radiomics allow qualitative and quantitative performance analyses with high throughput extraction of numeric radiologic data to obtain predictive or prognostic information from patients treated for cancer. A second approach is to define biological or constitutional that could change the practice. This technique included normal tissue individual susceptibility but also potential response of tumors under ionizing radiation treatment. These "omics" are biological and technical techniques leading to simultaneous novel identification and exploration a set of genes, lipids, proteins.

Comparison of established and emerging biodosimetry assays.

Rapid biodosimetry tools are required to assist with triage in the case of a large-scale radiation incident. Here, we aimed to determine the dose-assessment accuracy of the well-established dicentric chromosome assay (DCA) and cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (CBMN) in comparison to the emerging γ-H2AX foci and gene expression assays for triage mode biodosimetry and radiation injury assessment. Coded blood samples exposed to 10 X-ray doses (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) of up to 6.4 Gy were sent to participants for dose estimation. Report times were documented for each laboratory and assay. The mean absolute difference (MAD) of estimated doses relative to the true doses was calculated. We also merged doses into binary dose categories of clinical relevance and examined accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the assays. Dose estimates were reported by the first laboratories within 0.3-0.4 days of receipt of samples for the γ-H2AX and gene expression assays compared to 2.4 and 4 days for the DCA and CBMN assays, respectively. Irrespective of the assay we found a 2.5-4-fold variation of interlaboratory accuracy per assay and lowest MAD values for the DCA assay (0.16 Gy) followed by CBMN (0.34 Gy), gene expression (0.34 Gy) and γ-H2AX (0.45 Gy) foci assay. Binary categories of dose estimates could be discriminated with equal efficiency for all assays, but at doses ≥1.5 Gy a 10% decrease in efficiency was observed for the foci assay, which was still comparable to the CBMN assay. In conclusion, the DCA has been confirmed as the gold standard biodosimetry method, but in situations where speed and throughput are more important than ultimate accuracy, the emerging rapid molecular assays have the potential to become useful triage tools.

Laboratory intercomparison of gene expression assays.

The possibility of a large-scale acute radiation exposure necessitates the development of new methods that could provide rapid individual dose estimates with high sample throughput. The focus of the study was an intercomparison of laboratories' dose-assessment performances using gene expression assays. Lithium-heparinized whole blood from one healthy donor was irradiated (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) immediately after venipuncture at approximately 37°C using single X-ray doses. Blood samples to establish calibration curves (0.25-4 Gy) as well as 10 blinded test samples (0.1-6.4 Gy) were incubated for 24 h at 37°C supplemented with an equal volume of medium and 10% fetal calf serum. For quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR), samples were lysed, stored at -20°C and shipped on ice. For the Chemical Ligation Dependent Probe Amplification methodology (CLPA), aliquots were incubated in 2 ml CLPA reaction buffer (DxTerity), mixed and shipped at room temperature. Assays were run in each laboratory according to locally established protocols. The mean absolute difference (MAD) of estimated doses relative to the true doses (in Gy) was calculated. We also merged doses into binary categories reflecting aspects of clinical/diagnostic relevance and examined accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. The earliest reported time on dose estimates was <8 h. The standard deviation of technical replicate measurements in 75% of all measurements was below 11%. MAD values of 0.3-0.5 Gy and 0.8-1.3 Gy divided the laboratories contributions into two groups. These fourfold differences in accuracy could be primarily explained by unexpected variances of the housekeeping gene (P = 0.0008) and performance differences in processing of calibration and blinded test samples by half of the contributing laboratories. Reported gene expression dose estimates aggregated into binary categories in general showed an accuracies and sensitivities of 93-100% and 76-100% for the groups, with low MAD and high MAD, respectively. In conclusion, gene expression-based dose estimates were reported quickly, and for laboratories with MAD between 0.3-0.5 Gy binary dose categories of clinical significance could be discriminated with an accuracy and sensitivity comparable to established cytogenetic assays.