Literature DB >> 2762590

Repair capacity and kinetics of human skin during fractionated radiotherapy: erythema, desquamation, and telangiectasia after 3 and 5 year's follow-up.

I Turesson1, H D Thames.   

Abstract

Prospective clinical fractionation studies on acute and late reactions in skin have been going on since 1972 at the Radiotherapy Department in Gothenburg. The clinical assay consisted of breast cancer patients irradiated postoperatively to the internal mammary nodes from unilateral or bilateral fields exposed to various dose schedules. 750 fields in 450 patients have been analysed. Schedules with 1, 2 or 5 fractions per week and 2 or 3 fractions per day were evaluated with erythema, desquamation and telangiectasia as endpoints. For some schedules a dose-response relationship was established in a limited dose range, but often there was only one dose group per schedule. These data are suited to analysis by the method of direct analysis of quantal response. This was used in the present analysis, along with the linear quadratic (LQ) model and its generalization, the incomplete repair (IR) model. The repair capacity was similar for erythema and desquamation, with alpha/beta ratios between 7.5 and 11.2 Gy. Unexpectedly, there was more significant time factor during radiotherapy courses up to 6 weeks for erythema and desquamation, but the repair capacity was changed after 4 weeks for both endpoints, and alpha/beta increased to between 18.3 and 34.5 Gy. The repair capacity for late telangiectasia differed significantly from that for erythema and desquamation, with alpha/beta values between 2.8 and 4.3 Gy. There was a significant time factor for telangiectasia with characteristic doubling time of about 16 days, when an exponential function for time was used. Concerning the repair kinetics in skin, there were insufficient data to obtain precise estimates, but there was a suggestion of two components of repair. This was inferred from higher-than-predicted recovery with 15-min intervals, when the data were fitted with the monoexponential model. The monoexponential fit gave t1/2 between 1.1 and 1.3 h for acute effects and 3.5 h for late effects. Recovery after 15-min fractionation intervals, if it resulted from a fast repair component, would be consistent with a half-time of 0.3-0.4 h. The time factor and the relative long half-time for repair for late effects have important implications for multiple-fraction-per-day treatment, and imply that interfraction intervals of 4 h or less, as commonly used, will be insufficient. Instead, intervals of 6 h or longer are recommended. Using accelerated fractionation with a significant reduction in overall treatment time a dose reduction is still necessary to take into account the time factor for late effects.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2762590     DOI: 10.1016/0167-8140(89)90131-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  29 in total

1.  Optimal solution for a cancer radiotherapy problem.

Authors:  A Bertuzzi; C Bruni; F Papa; C Sinisgalli
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.259

2.  Biphasic and monophasic repair: comparative implications for biologically equivalent dose calculations in pulsed dose rate brachytherapy of cervical carcinoma.

Authors:  W T Millar; J H Hendry; S E Davidson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2013-08-09       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 3.  Pulsed dose rate brachytherapy.

Authors:  A Polo
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.405

4.  A Retrospective Analysis of Toxicity and Efficacy for 2 Hypofractionated Irradiation Schedules Versus a Conventional One for Post-Mastectomy Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Vassilis Kouloulias; Eftychia Mosa; Anna Zygogianni; Efrosini Kypraiou; John Georgakopoulos; Kalliopi Platoni; Christos Antypas; George Kyrgias; Maria Tolia; Christos Papadimitriou; Amanda Psyrri; George Patatoukas; Maria Dilvoi; Christina Armpilia; Kyriaki Theodorou; Maria-Aggeliki Kalogeridi; Ivelina Beli; John Kouvaris; Nikolaos Kelekis
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2016-09-28       Impact factor: 2.860

Review 5.  The contribution of women to radiobiology: Marie Curie and beyond.

Authors:  Anna Gasinska
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2015-12-29

6.  Reports of unexpected late side effects of accelerated partial breast irradiation--radiobiological considerations.

Authors:  Søren M Bentzen; John R Yarnold
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-07-15       Impact factor: 7.038

7.  The effect of pentoxifylline on radiobiological parameters in the rat radiation myelopathy.

Authors:  Won Dong Kim; Woo Yoon Park
Journal:  Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2006-12-31       Impact factor: 4.679

8.  Quality assurance analysis of participating centres' protocol compliance to a UK multicentre hypofractionated breast (FAST) trial.

Authors:  Y Tsang; K Venables; J Yarnold
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 9.  Normal tissue reactions to radiotherapy: towards tailoring treatment dose by genotype.

Authors:  Gillian C Barnett; Catherine M L West; Alison M Dunning; Rebecca M Elliott; Charlotte E Coles; Paul D P Pharoah; Neil G Burnet
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2009-01-16       Impact factor: 60.716

10.  On the feasibility of treating to a 1.5 cm PTV with a commercial single-entry hybrid applicator in APBI breast brachytherapy.

Authors:  Kent A Gifford; Christopher L Nelson; Steven M Kirsner; Kelly D Kisling; Matthew T Ballo; Elizabeth S Bloom
Journal:  J Contemp Brachytherapy       Date:  2012-03-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.