Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/105867
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Health Technology and Informatics-
dc.creatorWen, A-
dc.creatorWang, X-
dc.creatorWang, B-
dc.creatorYan, C-
dc.creatorLuo, J-
dc.creatorWang, P-
dc.creatorLi, J-
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-23T04:31:54Z-
dc.date.available2024-04-23T04:31:54Z-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/105867-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBioMed Central Ltd.en_US
dc.rights© The Author(s) 2022. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.en_US
dc.rightsThe following publication Wen, A., Wang, X., Wang, B. et al. Radiobiological and dosimetric comparison of 60Co versus 192Ir high-dose-rate intracavitary-interstitial brachytherapy for cervical cancer. Radiat Oncol 17, 206 (2022) is available at https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-022-02170-8.en_US
dc.subject192Iren_US
dc.subject60Coen_US
dc.subjectCervical canceren_US
dc.subjectHDR brachytherapyen_US
dc.subjectIC-ISBTen_US
dc.titleRadiobiological and dosimetric comparison of 60Co versus 192Ir high-dose-rate intracavitary-interstitial brachytherapy for cervical canceren_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume17-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s13014-022-02170-8-
dcterms.abstractBackground: High-dose-rate (HDR) intracavitary-interstitial brachytherapy (IC-ISBT) is an effective treatment for bulky, middle, and advanced cervical cancer. In this study, we compared the differences between 60Co and 192Ir HDR IC-ISBT plans in terms of radiobiological and dosimetric parameters, providing a reference for clinical workers in brachytherapy.-
dcterms.abstractMethods: A total of 30 patients with cervical cancer receiving HDR IC-ISBT were included in this study, and IC-ISBT plans for each individual were designed with both 60Co and 192Ir at a prescribed dose of CTV D90 = 6 Gy while keeping the dose to OARs as low as possible. Physical dose and dose–volume parameters of CTV and OARs were extracted from TPS. The EQD2, EUBED, EUD, TCP, and NTCP were calculated using corresponding formulas. The differences between the 60Co and 192Ir IC-ISBT plans were compared using the paired t-test.-
dcterms.abstractResults: In each patient's 60Co and 192Ir IC-ISBT plan, the average physical dose and EQD2 of 60Co were lower than those of 192Ir, and there were statistically significant differences in D2cc and D1cc for the OARs (p < 0.05); there were statistically significant differences in D0.1 cc for the bladder (p < 0.05) and no significant differences in D0.1 cc for the rectum or intestines (p > 0.05). The EUBED ratio (60Co/192Ir) at the CTV was mostly close to 1 when neither 60Co or 192Ir passed their half-lives or when both passed two half-lives, and the difference between them was not significant; at the OARs, the mean value of 60Co was lower than that of 192Ir. There was no statistical difference between 60Co and 192Ir in the EUD (93.93 versus 93.92 Gy, p > 0.05) and TCP (97.07% versus 97.08%, p > 0.05) of the tumors. The mean NTCP value of 60Co was lower than that of 192Ir.-
dcterms.abstractConclusions: Considering the CTV and OARs, the dosimetric parameters of 60Co and 192Ir are comparable. Compared with 192Ir, the use of 60Co for HDR IC-ISBT can ensure a similar tumor control probability while providing better protection to the OARs. In addition, 60Co has obvious economic advantages and can be promoted as a good alternative to 192Ir.-
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationRadiation oncology, 2022, v. 17, 206-
dcterms.isPartOfRadiation oncology-
dcterms.issued2022-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85143800183-
dc.identifier.pmid36514118-
dc.identifier.eissn1748-717X-
dc.identifier.artn206-
dc.description.validate202404 bcch-
dc.description.oaVersion of Recorden_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumberOA_Scopus/WOSen_US
dc.description.fundingSourceOthersen_US
dc.description.fundingTextElekta AB (Stockholm, Sweden); Sichuan Science and Technology Program; Medical Engineering Innovation Fund for Canceren_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
dc.description.oaCategoryCCen_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
s13014-022-02170-8.pdf1.8 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Version of Record
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

34
Citations as of Jun 30, 2024

Downloads

26
Citations as of Jun 30, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.