-
- Rui Zhang, Rebecca M Howell, Phillip J Taddei, Annelise Giebeler, Anita Mahajan, and Wayne D Newhauser.
- The University of Texas Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences at Houston, USA; Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.
- Radiother Oncol. 2014 Oct 1; 113 (1): 84-8.
PurposeTo compare the risks of radiogenic second cancers and cardiac mortality in 17 pediatric medulloblastoma patients treated with passively scattered proton or field-in-field photon craniospinal irradiation (CSI).Material/MethodsStandard of care photon or proton CSI treatment plans were created for all 17 patients in a commercial treatment planning system (TPS) (Eclipse version 8.9; Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) and prescription dose was 23.4 or 23.4 Gy (RBE) to the age specific target volume at 1.8 Gy/fraction. The therapeutic doses from proton and photon CSI plans were estimated from TPS. Stray radiation doses were determined from Monte Carlo simulations for proton CSI and from measurements and TPS for photon CSI. The Biological Effects of Ionization Radiation VII report and a linear model based on childhood cancer survivor data were used for risk predictions of second cancer and cardiac mortality, respectively.ResultsThe ratios of lifetime attributable risk (RLARs) (proton/photon) ranged from 0.10 to 0.22 for second cancer incidence and ranged from 0.20 to 0.53 for second cancer mortality, respectively. The ratio of relative risk (RRR) (proton/photon) of cardiac mortality ranged from 0.12 to 0.24. The RLARs of both cancer incidence and mortality decreased with patient's age at exposure (e), while the RRRs of cardiac mortality increased with e. Girls had a significantly higher RLAR of cancer mortality than boys.ConclusionPassively scattered proton CSI provides superior predicted outcomes by conferring lower predicted risks of second cancer and cardiac mortality than field-in-field photon CSI for all medulloblastoma patients in a large clinically representative sample in the United States, but the magnitude of superiority depends strongly on the patients' anatomical development status.Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.