Literature DB >> 33993271

Secondary cancer risk from modern external-beam radiotherapy of prostate cancer patients: Impact of fractionation and dose distribution.

Chomporn Sitathanee1, Puangpen Tangboonduangjit1, Mantana Dhanachai1, Sawanee Suntiwong1, Pornpan Yongvithisatid1, Sukanya Rutchantuk1, Pimolpun Changkaew1, Rattana Watjiranon1, Suphalak Khachonkham1, Vipa Boonkitticharoen1.   

Abstract

Modern radiotherapy (RT) uses altered fractionation, long beam-on time and image-guided procedure. This study aimed to compare secondary cancer risk (SCR) associated with primary field, scatter/leakage radiations and image-guided procedure in prostate treatment using intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), CyberKnife stereotactic body RT (CK-SBRT) in relative to 3-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT). Prostate plans were generated for 3D-CRT, IMRT (39 fractions of 2 Gy), and CK-SBRT (five fractions of 7.25 Gy). Excess absolute risk (EAR) was calculated for organs in the primary field using Schneider's mechanistic model and concept of organ equivalent dose (OED) to account for dose inhomogeneity. Doses from image-guided procedure and scatter/leakage radiations were determined by phantom measurements. The results showed that hypofractionation relative to conventional fractionation yielded lower SCR for organs in primary field (p ≤ 0.0001). SCR was further modulated by dose-volume distribution. For organs near the field edge, like the rectum and pelvic bone, CK-SBRT plan rendered better risk profiles than IMRT and 3D-CRT because of the absence of volume peak in high dose region (relative risk [RR]: 0.65, 0.22, respectively, p ≤ 0.0004). CK-SBRT and IMRT generated more scatter/leakage and imaging doses than 3D-CRT (p ≤ 0.0002). But primary field was the major contributor to SCR. EAR estimates (risk contributions, primary field: scatter/leakage radiations: imaging procedure) were 7.1 excess cases per 104 person-year (PY; 3.64:2.25:1) for CK-SBRT, 9.93 (7.32:2.33:1) for IMRT and 8.24 (15.99:2.35:1) for 3D-CRT (p ≤ 0.0002). We conclude that modern RT added more but small SCR from scatter/leakage and imaging doses. The primary field is a major contributor of risk which can be mitigated by the use of hypofractionation.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Japanese Radiation Research Society and Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CyberKnife stereotactic body radiotherapy (CK-SBRT); imaging dose; intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT); primary field; scatter/leakage radiations; secondary cancer risk (SCR)

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33993271      PMCID: PMC8273793          DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rrab038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Radiat Res        ISSN: 0449-3060            Impact factor:   2.724


  33 in total

1.  The risk of second malignancy in men with prostate cancer treated with or without radiation in British Columbia, 1984-2000.

Authors:  Tom Pickles; Norm Phillips
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 6.280

2.  Secondary malignancies from prostate cancer radiation treatment: a risk analysis of the influence of target margins and fractionation patterns.

Authors:  Alexandru Daşu; Iuliana Toma-Daşu; Lars Franzén; Anders Widmark; Per Nilsson
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-05-14       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  Cancer incidence after localized therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Kihyuck Moon; George J Stukenborg; Jessica Keim; Dan Theodorescu
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 4.  Treatment options for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ravinder Mohan; Paul F Schellhammer
Journal:  Am Fam Physician       Date:  2011-08-15       Impact factor: 3.292

5.  Latent period in induction of radiogenic solid tumors in the cohort of emergency workers.

Authors:  Victor K Ivanov; A I Gorsky; V V Kashcheev; M A Maksioutov; K A Tumanov
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2009-03-27       Impact factor: 1.925

6.  Site-specific dose-response relationships for cancer induction from the combined Japanese A-bomb and Hodgkin cohorts for doses relevant to radiotherapy.

Authors:  Uwe Schneider; Marcin Sumila; Judith Robotka
Journal:  Theor Biol Med Model       Date:  2011-07-26       Impact factor: 2.432

Review 7.  Second primary cancers after radiation for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the clinical data and impact of treatment technique.

Authors:  Louise Murray; Ann Henry; Peter Hoskin; Frank-Andre Siebert; Jack Venselaar
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 6.280

8.  Sarcoma risk after radiation exposure.

Authors:  Amy Berrington de Gonzalez; Alina Kutsenko; Preetha Rajaraman
Journal:  Clin Sarcoma Res       Date:  2012-10-04

9.  Stereotactic body radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: disease control and quality of life at 6 years.

Authors:  Alan J Katz; Michael Santoro; Fred Diblasio; Richard Ashley
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 3.481

10.  Assessment of organ dose reduction and secondary cancer risk associated with the use of proton beam therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy in treatment of neuroblastomas.

Authors:  Hiroshi Fuji; Uwe Schneider; Yuji Ishida; Masahiro Konno; Haruo Yamashita; Yuki Kase; Shigeyuki Murayama; Tsuyoshi Onoe; Hirofumi Ogawa; Hideyuki Harada; Hirofumi Asakura; Tetsuo Nishimura
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 3.481

View more
  1 in total

1.  Semi-experimental assessment of neutron equivalent dose and secondary cancer risk for off-field organs in glioma patients undergoing 18-MV radiotherapy.

Authors:  Soheil Elmtalab; Iraj Abedi; Zahra Alirezaei; Mohammad Hossein Choopan Dastjerdi; Ghazale Geraily; Amir Hossein Karimi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-29       Impact factor: 3.752

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.