Evaluation of the Radiation Dose–Volume Effects of Optic Nerves and Chiasm by Psychophysical, Electrophysiologic Tests, and Optical Coherence Tomography in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma

• Published in: Technology in cancer research & treatment 2017-12, Vol.16 (6), p.969-977
• Main Authors: Ozkaya Akagunduz, Ozlem, Guven Yilmaz, Suzan, Yalman, Deniz, Yuce, Berna, Demirkilinc Biler, Elif, Afrashi, Filiz, Esassolak, Mustafa
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Original
• ISSN: 1533-0346; 1533-0338
• DOI: 10.1177/1533034617711613

Purpose: To evaluate the radiation dose–volume effects of optic nerves and chiasm by visual psychophysical, electrophysiologic tests, and optical coherence tomography in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Materials and Methods: A series of visual tests including visual acuity, visual field, contrast sensitivity, visual evoked potential, and optical coherence tomography were administered to 20 patients with locally advanced (T3-T4) nasopharyngeal carcinoma who were treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy. Volume that received 55 Gy (V55), mean dose (D mean), highest dose to 5% of the volume (D5), and maximum dose (Dmax) for optic nerves and chiasm were evaluated for each patient. Cutoff values were identified as V55: 50%, Dmean: 50 Gy, D5: 55 Gy, and Dmax: 60 Gy. The effects of radiation dose–volume on ophthalmologic tests were evaluated. Results: Ophthalmological evaluation revealed optic neuropathy with simultaneous retinopathy in 6 eyes of 4 patients and radiation retinopathy alone in both eyes of 1 patient. Regarding radiation dose–volume effects of the optic nerve, significant detrimental effect of all parameters was observed on visual acuity. Visual field and contrast sensitivity were affected significantly with V55 ≥ 50% and Dmean ≥ 50 Gy. Visual evoked potential latency was affected significantly with Dmean ≥ 50 Gy, D5 ≥ 55 Gy, and Dmax ≥ 60 Gy. For the chiasm, significant detrimental effect of all parameters was observed on visual acuity as well. Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness and visual evoked potential amplitude were not affected by any of the dose–volume parameters neither optic nerves nor chiasm. Conclusion: The volume receiving the threshold dose, mean dose, and 5% of the volume receiving the maximum dose are important parameters besides maximum dose to optic nerves and chiasm. A comprehensive ophthalmological evaluation including visual field, contrast sensitivity, visual evoked potential latency, and amplitude should be performed for these patients. Visual evoked potential latency is an objective predictor of vision loss before the onset of clinical signs.