BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Regeneration of the aerodigestive mucosa is known to occur during conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. The circumstances surrounding its time of onset and magnitude are not well understood, however. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Mucosal reactions were observed in 100 patients undergoing conventionally fractionated treatment at 2 Gy/day over 7 weeks and 88 receiving accelerated treatment at 1.8 Gy twice daily over 3 1/2 weeks on the Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group head and neck cancer trials. Similar observations in 61 patients treated palliatively at dose rates between 0.8 and 240 Gy/h using ten 3.0-4.2 Gy fractions over 2 weeks are compared. RESULTS: Several findings emerged from these studies: 1. Reactions evolved more quickly at oropharyngeal sites than in the hypopharynx. 2. Reactions at both sites evolved more rapidly at greater rates of dose accumulation. 3. The timing of reactions suggested the presence of a strong regenerative mucosal response that started before the manifestation of "patchy' (grade II) mucosal reactions. 4. The regenerative response was strong enough to "make good' damage accumulated at a rate of 2 Gy/day in over a third of cases. 5. The linear quadratic model without time correction failed to provide an adequate prediction of the frequency or intensity of mucosal reactions produced by any of the regimes. A simple model of the regenerative response is presented. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the timing and magnitude of the regenerative response vary between sites and individuals but are linked to the amount of epithelial cellular depletion occurring during treatment.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Regeneration of the aerodigestive mucosa is known to occur during conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. The circumstances surrounding its time of onset and magnitude are not well understood, however. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Mucosal reactions were observed in 100 patients undergoing conventionally fractionated treatment at 2 Gy/day over 7 weeks and 88 receiving accelerated treatment at 1.8 Gy twice daily over 3 1/2 weeks on the Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group head and neck cancer trials. Similar observations in 61 patients treated palliatively at dose rates between 0.8 and 240 Gy/h using ten 3.0-4.2 Gy fractions over 2 weeks are compared. RESULTS: Several findings emerged from these studies: 1. Reactions evolved more quickly at oropharyngeal sites than in the hypopharynx. 2. Reactions at both sites evolved more rapidly at greater rates of dose accumulation. 3. The timing of reactions suggested the presence of a strong regenerative mucosal response that started before the manifestation of "patchy' (grade II) mucosal reactions. 4. The regenerative response was strong enough to "make good' damage accumulated at a rate of 2 Gy/day in over a third of cases. 5. The linear quadratic model without time correction failed to provide an adequate prediction of the frequency or intensity of mucosal reactions produced by any of the regimes. A simple model of the regenerative response is presented. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the timing and magnitude of the regenerative response vary between sites and individuals but are linked to the amount of epithelial cellular depletion occurring during treatment.