| Chen HC |
------>authors3_c= ------>paper_class1=1 ------>Impact_Factor=None ------>paper_class3=1 ------>paper_class2=1 ------>vol=2 ------>confirm_bywho=None ------>insert_bywho=enochlai49 ------>Jurnal_Rank=None ------>authors4_c= ------>comm_author= ------>patent_EDate=None ------>authors5_c= ------>publish_day=1 ------>paper_class2Letter=None ------>page2=344 ------>medlineContent= ------>unit=000 ------>insert_date=20090314 ------>iam=4 ------>update_date=None ------>author=??? ------>change_event=1 ------>ISSN= ------>authors_c= ------>score=71 ------>journal_name=Therapeut Radiol Oncol ------>paper_name=Normal tissue doses of radiation from radiotherapy of breast cancer ------>confirm_date=None ------>tch_id=083041 ------>pmid=19349657 ------>page1=337 ------>fullAbstract=Pulsed dose rate brachytherapy (PDR) was compared to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in the case of breast cancer. The benefits were figured out by evaluation of dosimetric parameters and calculating the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). PDR plans were set up for five randomly chosen left-sided breast cancer patients delivering a total dose of 50.4 Gy to the target (dose rate 0.8 Gy h(-1)). For EBRT five left-sided breast cancer patients were planned using 3D-conformal tangential photon beams with a prescribed total dose of 50 Gy (2 Gy/fraction) to the total breast volume. For plan ranking and NTCP calculation the physical dose was first converted into the biologically effective dose (BED) and then into the normalized total dose (NTD) using the linear quadratic model with an alpha/beta ratio of 3 Gy. In PDR the relative effectiveness (RE) was calculated for each dose bin of the differential dose volume histogram to get the BED. NTCPs were calculated for the ipsilateral lung and the heart as contoured on CT slices based on the Lyman model and the Kutcher reduction scheme. Dosimetric parameters as V(th) (percentage of the total volume exceeding a threshold dose) and Jackson~s f(dam) (fraction of the organ damaged) were also used to figure out the benefits. The comparison of calculated NTCPs in PDR and EBRT showed no difference between these two modalities. All values were below 0.01%. f(dam) derived from EBRT was always higher (mean value 8.95% versus 1.21% for the lung). The mean V(10) and V(20) of the lung related to BED were 6.32% and 1.72% for PDR versus 11.72% and 9.59% for EBRT. When using dosimetric parameters as V(th) and f(dam), PDR was mostly superior to EBRT in respect of sparing normal tissues. NTCP calculation as a single method of modality ranking showed a lack of information, especially when normal tissue was exposed to low radiation doses. ------>tmu_sno=None ------>sno=21536 ------>authors2=Yeh JI ------>authors3=Yeh YC ------>authors4=Lai YL ------>authors5=Chen WC ------>authors6= ------>authors6_c= ------>authors=Chen HC ------>delete_flag=0 ------>SCI_JNo=None ------>authors2_c= ------>publish_area=0 ------>updateTitle=Comparison of PDR brachytherapy and external beam radiation therapy in the case of breast cancer. ------>language=2 ------>check_flag=None ------>submit_date=None ------>country=NULL ------>no= ------>patent_SDate=None ------>update_bywho=None ------>publish_year=1995 ------>submit_flag=None ------>publish_month=1 |