liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Secondary malignancies from prostate cancer radiation treatment: a risk analysis of the influence of target margins and fractionation patterns
Umeå University.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8171-2541
Stockholm University and Karolinska Institutet.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7101-240X
Umeå University.
Umeå University.
Show others and affiliations
2011 (English)In: International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, ISSN 1879-355X, Vol. 79, no 3, 738-746 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

PURPOSE: This study explores the implications for cancer induction of treatment details such as fractionation, planning target volume (PTV) definition, and interpatient variations, which are relevant for the radiation treatment of prostate carcinomas.

METHODS AND MATERIALS: Treatment planning data from 100 patients have been analyzed with a risk model based on the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation competition model. The risk model can account for dose heterogeneity and fractionation effects characteristic for modern radiotherapy. Biologically relevant parameters from clinical and experimental data have been used with the model.

RESULTS: The results suggested that changes in prescribed dose could lead to a modification of the risks for individual organs surrounding the clinical target volume (CTV) but that the total risk appears to be less affected by changes in the target dose. Larger differences are observed for modifications of the margins between the CTV and the PTV because these have direct impact onto the dose level and dose heterogeneity in the healthy tissues surrounding the CTV. Interpatient anatomic variations also have to be taken into consideration for studies of the risk for cancer induction from radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS: The results have shown the complex interplay between the risk for secondary malignancies, the details of the treatment delivery, and the patient heterogeneity that may influence comparisons between the long-term effects of various treatment techniques. Nevertheless, absolute risk levels seem very small and comparable to mortality risks from surgical interventions, thus supporting the robustness of radiation therapy as a successful treatment modality for prostate carcinomas.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2011. Vol. 79, no 3, 738-746 p.
Keyword [en]
Prostate cancer; Carcinogenesis; Radiation treatment; DVH; Fractionation
National Category
Cancer and Oncology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-71978DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.12.004PubMedID: 20472345OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-71978DiVA: diva2:455880
Available from: 2011-11-11 Created: 2011-11-11 Last updated: 2014-08-13

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Daşu, AlexandruToma-Daşu, Iuliana

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Daşu, AlexandruToma-Daşu, Iuliana
Cancer and Oncology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 182 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf