Literature DB >> 20844596

AMBIENT DOSE EQUIVALENT VERSUS EFFECTIVE DOSE FOR QUANTIFYING STRAY RADIATION EXPOSURES TO A PATIENT RECEIVING PROTON THERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER.

Jonas D Fontenot1, Phillip Taddei, Yuanshui Zheng, Dragan Mirkovic, Wayne D Newhauser.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the suitability of the quantity ambient dose equivalent H*(10) as a conservative estimate of effective dose E for estimating stray radiation exposures to patients receiving passively scattered proton radiotherapy for cancer of the prostate. H*(10), which is determined from fluence free-in-air, is potentially useful because it is simpler to measure or calculate because it avoids the complexities associated with phantoms or patient anatomy. However, the suitability of H*(10) as a surrogate for E has not been demonstrated for exposures to high-energy neutrons emanating from radiation treatments with proton beams. The suitability was tested by calculating H*(10) and E for a proton treatment using a Monte Carlo model of a double-scattering treatment machine and a computerized anthropomorphic phantom. The calculated E for the simulated treatment was 5.5 mSv/Gy, while the calculated H*(10) at the isocenter was 10 mSv/Gy. A sensitivity analysis revealed that H*(10) conservatively estimated E for the interval of treatment parameters common in proton therapy for prostate cancer. However, sensitivity analysis of a broader interval of parameters suggested that H*(10) may underestimate E for treatments of other sites, particularly those that require large field sizes. Simulations revealed that while E was predominated by neutrons generated in the nozzle, neutrons produced in the patient contributed up to 40% to dose equivalent in near-field organs.

Entities:  

Year:  2009        PMID: 20844596      PMCID: PMC2938795          DOI: 10.13182/nt09-a9121

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nucl Technol        ISSN: 0029-5450


  14 in total

1.  Treatment planning comparison of conventional, 3D conformal, and intensity-modulated photon (IMRT) and proton therapy for paranasal sinus carcinoma.

Authors:  Ulrike Mock; Dietmar Georg; Joachim Bogner; Thomas Auberger; Richard Pötter
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2004-01-01       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  Relative biological effectiveness (RBE), quality factor (Q), and radiation weighting factor (w(R)). A report of the International Commission on Radiological Protection.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2003

3.  Design tools for proton therapy nozzles based on the double-scattering foil technique.

Authors:  J D Fontenot; W D Newhauser; U Titt
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 0.972

4.  Dose-volume comparison of proton therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Carlos Vargas; Amber Fryer; Chaitali Mahajan; Daniel Indelicato; David Horne; Angela Chellini; Craig McKenzie; Paula Lawlor; Randal Henderson; Zuofeng Li; Liyong Lin; Kenneth Olivier; Sameer Keole
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2007-09-27       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  Monte Carlo study of neutron dose equivalent during passive scattering proton therapy.

Authors:  Yuanshui Zheng; Wayne Newhauser; Jonas Fontenot; Phil Taddei; Radhe Mohan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-06-27       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Second malignancies in prostate carcinoma patients after radiotherapy compared with surgery.

Authors:  D J Brenner; R E Curtis; E J Hall; E Ron
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-01-15       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Monte Carlo simulation of a protontherapy platform devoted to ocular melanoma.

Authors:  J Hérault; N Iborra; B Serrano; P Chauvel
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Cancer-specific mortality after surgery or radiation for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer managed during the prostate-specific antigen era.

Authors:  Anthony V D'Amico; Judd Moul; Peter R Carroll; Leon Sun; Deborah Lubeck; Ming-Hui Chen
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-06-01       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Conformal proton therapy for prostate carcinoma.

Authors:  J D Slater; L T Yonemoto; C J Rossi; N J Reyes-Molyneux; D A Bush; J E Antoine; L N Loredo; R W Schulte; S L Teichman; J M Slater
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1998-09-01       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 10.  Secondary neutrons in clinical proton radiotherapy: a charged issue.

Authors:  David J Brenner; Eric J Hall
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2008-01-14       Impact factor: 6.280

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.