Literature DB >> 26283051

Rapid RBE-Weighted Proton Radiation Dosimetry Risk Assessment.

Mohammad A Z Qutub1, Susan B Klein1, Jeffrey C Buchsbaum2.   

Abstract

Proton therapy dose is affected by relative biological effectiveness differently than X-ray therapies. The current clinically accepted weighting factor is 1.1 at all positions along the depth-dose profile. However, the relative biological effectiveness correlates with the linear energy transfer, cell or tissue type, and the dose per fraction causing variation of relative biological effectiveness along the depth-dose profile. In this article, we present a simple relative biological effectiveness-weighted treatment planning risk assessment algorithm in 2-dimensions and compare the results with those derived using the standard relative biological effectiveness of 1.1. The isodose distribution profiles for beams were accomplished using matrices that represent coplanar intersecting beams. These matrices were combined and contoured using MATLAB to achieve the distribution of dose. There are some important differences in dose distribution between the dose profiles resulting from the use of relative biological effectiveness = 1.1 and the empirically derived depth-dependent values of relative biological effectiveness. Significant hot spots of up to twice the intended dose are indicated in some beam configurations. This simple and rapid risk analysis could quickly evaluate the safety of various dose delivery schema.
© The Author(s) 2015.

Entities:  

Keywords:  LET; RBE; dosimetry; linear energy transfer; proton; radiation therapy; relative biologic effect; safety; treatment planning

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26283051     DOI: 10.1177/1533034615599313

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 1533-0338


  5 in total

Review 1.  Charged-particle therapy in cancer: clinical uses and future perspectives.

Authors:  Marco Durante; Roberto Orecchia; Jay S Loeffler
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-03-14       Impact factor: 66.675

2.  Quantifying the risk and dosimetric variables of symptomatic brainstem injury after proton beam radiation in pediatric brain tumors.

Authors:  Rituraj Upadhyay; Kaiping Liao; David R Grosshans; Susan L McGovern; Mary Frances McAleer; Wafik Zaky; Murali M Chintagumpala; Anita Mahajan; Debra Nana Yeboa; Arnold C Paulino
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2022-09-01       Impact factor: 13.029

Review 3.  Radiation-agent combinations for glioblastoma: challenges in drug development and future considerations.

Authors:  Charles A Kunos; Evanthia Galanis; Jeffrey Buchsbaum; Qian Shi; Lewis C Strauss; C Norman Coleman; Mansoor M Ahmed
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2017-05-30       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 4.  National Cancer Institute Workshop on Proton Therapy for Children: Considerations Regarding Brainstem Injury.

Authors:  Daphne Haas-Kogan; Daniel Indelicato; Harald Paganetti; Natia Esiashvili; Anita Mahajan; Torunn Yock; Stella Flampouri; Shannon MacDonald; Maryam Fouladi; Kry Stephen; John Kalapurakal; Stephanie Terezakis; Hanne Kooy; David Grosshans; Mike Makrigiorgos; Kavita Mishra; Tina Young Poussaint; Kenneth Cohen; Thomas Fitzgerald; Vinai Gondi; Arthur Liu; Jeff Michalski; Dragan Mirkovic; Radhe Mohan; Stephanie Perkins; Kenneth Wong; Bhadrasain Vikram; Jeff Buchsbaum; Larry Kun
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  Moving Forward in the Next Decade: Radiation Oncology Sciences for Patient-Centered Cancer Care.

Authors:  C Norman Coleman; Jeffrey C Buchsbaum; Pataje G S Prasanna; Jacek Capala; Ceferino Obcemea; Michael G Espey; Mansoor M Ahmed; Julie A Hong; Bhadrasain Vikram
Journal:  JNCI Cancer Spectr       Date:  2021-05-17
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.