Literature DB >> 19305036

The risk of developing a second cancer after receiving craniospinal proton irradiation.

Wayne D Newhauser1, Jonas D Fontenot, Anita Mahajan, David Kornguth, Marilyn Stovall, Yuanshui Zheng, Phillip J Taddei, Dragan Mirkovic, Radhe Mohan, James D Cox, Shiao Woo.   

Abstract

The purpose of this work was to compare the risk of developing a second cancer after craniospinal irradiation using photon versus proton radiotherapy by means of simulation studies designed to account for the effects of neutron exposures. Craniospinal irradiation of a male phantom was calculated for passively-scattered and scanned-beam proton treatment units. Organ doses were estimated from treatment plans; for the proton treatments, the amount of stray radiation was calculated separately using the Monte Carlo method. The organ doses were converted to risk of cancer incidence using a standard formalism developed for radiation protection purposes. The total lifetime risk of second cancer due exclusively to stray radiation was 1.5% for the passively scattered treatment versus 0.8% for the scanned proton beam treatment. Taking into account the therapeutic and stray radiation fields, the risk of second cancer from intensity-modulated radiation therapy and conventional radiotherapy photon treatments were 7 and 12 times higher than the risk associated with scanned-beam proton therapy, respectively, and 6 and 11 times higher than with passively scattered proton therapy, respectively. Simulations revealed that both passively scattered and scanned-beam proton therapies confer significantly lower risks of second cancers than 6 MV conventional and intensity-modulated photon therapies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19305036      PMCID: PMC4144016          DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/54/8/002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  37 in total

1.  Spread-out Bragg peak and monitor units calculation with the Monte Carlo code MCNPX.

Authors:  J Hérault; N Iborra; B Serrano; P Chauvel
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Monte Carlo simulations for configuring and testing an analytical proton dose-calculation algorithm.

Authors:  Wayne Newhauser; Jonas Fontenot; Yuanshui Zheng; Jerimy Polf; Uwe Titt; Nicholas Koch; Xiaodong Zhang; Radhe Mohan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-07-10       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Dosimetric impact of tantalum markers used in the treatment of uveal melanoma with proton beam therapy.

Authors:  Wayne D Newhauser; Nicholas C Koch; Jonas D Fontenot; Stanley J Rosenthal; Dan S Gombos; Markus M Fitzek; Radhe Mohan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-06-06       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Cost-effectiveness of proton radiation in the treatment of childhood medulloblastoma.

Authors:  Jonas Lundkvist; Mattias Ekman; Suzanne Rehn Ericsson; Bengt Jönsson; Bengt Glimelius
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2005-02-15       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Prognostic factors and secondary malignancies in childhood medulloblastoma.

Authors:  T Stavrou; C M Bromley; H S Nicholson; J Byrne; R J Packer; A M Goldstein; G H Reaman
Journal:  J Pediatr Hematol Oncol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 1.289

6.  Assessment of the accuracy of an MCNPX-based Monte Carlo simulation model for predicting three-dimensional absorbed dose distributions.

Authors:  U Titt; N Sahoo; X Ding; Y Zheng; W D Newhauser; X R Zhu; J C Polf; M T Gillin; R Mohan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-07-31       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Reducing stray radiation dose to patients receiving passively scattered proton radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Phillip J Taddei; Jonas D Fontenot; Yuanshui Zheng; Dragan Mirkovic; Andrew K Lee; Uwe Titt; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-03-27       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Equivalent dose and effective dose from stray radiation during passively scattered proton radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jonas Fontenot; Phillip Taddei; Yuanshui Zheng; Dragan Mirkovic; Thomas Jordan; Wayne Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-02-29       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  The impact of protons on the incidence of second malignancies in radiotherapy.

Authors:  Eric J Hall
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2007-08

10.  Monte Carlo simulations of neutron spectral fluence, radiation weighting factor and ambient dose equivalent for a passively scattered proton therapy unit.

Authors:  Yuanshui Zheng; Jonas Fontenot; Phil Taddei; Dragan Mirkovic; Wayne Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-12-19       Impact factor: 3.609

View more
  56 in total

1.  Estimate of the uncertainties in the relative risk of secondary malignant neoplasms following proton therapy and intensity-modulated photon therapy.

Authors:  Jonas D Fontenot; Charles Bloch; David Followill; Uwe Titt; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Methodology for determining doses to in-field, out-of-field and partially in-field organs for late effects studies in photon radiotherapy.

Authors:  Rebecca M Howell; Sarah B Scarboro; Phillip J Taddei; Sunil Krishnan; Stephen F Kry; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Predicted risks of second malignant neoplasm incidence and mortality due to secondary neutrons in a girl and boy receiving proton craniospinal irradiation.

Authors:  Phillip J Taddei; Anita Mahajan; Dragan Mirkovic; Rui Zhang; Annelise Giebeler; David Kornguth; Mark Harvey; Shiao Woo; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Risk of second malignant neoplasm following proton versus intensity-modulated photon radiotherapies for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Phillip J Taddei; Rebecca M Howell; Sunil Krishnan; Sarah B Scarboro; Dragan Mirkovic; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Low- and middle-income countries can reduce risks of subsequent neoplasms by referring pediatric craniospinal cases to centralized proton treatment centers.

Authors:  Phillip J Taddei; Nabil Khater; Bassem Youssef; Rebecca M Howell; Wassim Jalbout; Rui Zhang; Fady B Geara; Annelise Giebeler; Anita Mahajan; Dragan Mirkovic; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Biomed Phys Eng Express       Date:  2018-02-07

Review 6.  Assessment of the risk for developing a second malignancy from scattered and secondary radiation in radiation therapy.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.316

7.  Comparison of risk of radiogenic second cancer following photon and proton craniospinal irradiation for a pediatric medulloblastoma patient.

Authors:  Rui Zhang; Rebecca M Howell; Annelise Giebeler; Phillip J Taddei; Anita Mahajan; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  ANALYTICAL MODEL TO ESTIMATE EQUIVALENT DOSE FROM INTERNAL NEUTRONS IN PROTON THERAPY OF CHILDREN WITH INTRACRANIAL TUMORS.

Authors:  Kyle J Gallagher; Phillip J Taddei
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 0.972

9.  Risk-optimized proton therapy to minimize radiogenic second cancers.

Authors:  Laura A Rechner; John G Eley; Rebecca M Howell; Rui Zhang; Dragan Mirkovic; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-04-28       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  Analytical model for out-of-field dose in photon craniospinal irradiation.

Authors:  Phillip J Taddei; Wassim Jalbout; Rebecca M Howell; Nabil Khater; Fady Geara; Kenneth Homann; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-10-08       Impact factor: 3.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.