% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Gillmann:120082,
author = {C. Gillmann and O. Jäkel$^*$ and I. Schlampp and C.
Karger$^*$},
title = {{T}emporal lobe reactions after carbon ion radiation
therapy: comparison of relative biological
effectiveness-weighted tolerance doses predicted by local
effect models {I} and {IV}.15},
journal = {International journal of radiation oncology, biology,
physics},
volume = {88},
number = {5},
issn = {0360-3016},
address = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
publisher = {Elsevier Science},
reportid = {DKFZ-2017-00669},
pages = {1136 - 1141},
year = {2014},
abstract = {To compare the relative biological effectiveness
(RBE)-weighted tolerance doses for temporal lobe reactions
after carbon ion radiation therapy using 2 different
versions of the local effect model (LEM I vs LEM IV) for the
same patient collective under identical conditions.In a
previous study, 59 patients were investigated, of whom 10
experienced temporal lobe reactions (TLR) after carbon ion
radiation therapy for low-grade skull-base chordoma and
chondrosarcoma at Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung
(GSI) in Darmstadt, Germany in 2002 and 2003. TLR were
detected as visible contrast enhancements on T1-weighted MRI
images within a median follow-up time of 2.5 years. Although
the derived RBE-weighted temporal lobe doses were based on
the clinically applied LEM I, we have now recalculated the
RBE-weighted dose distributions using LEM IV and derived
dose-response curves with Dmax,V-1 cm³ (the RBE-weighted
maximum dose in the remaining temporal lobe volume,
excluding the volume of 1 cm³ with the highest dose) as an
independent dosimetric variable. The resulting RBE-weighted
tolerance doses were compared with those of the previous
study to assess the clinical impact of LEM IV relative to
LEM I.The dose-response curve of LEM IV is shifted toward
higher values compared to that of LEM I. The RBE-weighted
tolerance dose for a $5\%$ complication probability (TD5)
increases from 68.8 ± 3.3 to 78.3 ± 4.3 Gy (RBE) for LEM
IV as compared to LEM I.LEM IV predicts a clinically
significant increase of the RBE-weighted tolerance doses for
the temporal lobe as compared to the currently applied LEM
I. The limited available photon data do not allow a final
conclusion as to whether RBE predictions of LEM I or LEM IV
better fit better clinical experience in photon therapy. The
decision about a future clinical application of LEM IV
therefore requires additional analysis of temporal lobe
reactions in a comparable photon-treated collective using
the same dosimetric variable as in the present study.},
keywords = {Ions (NLM Chemicals) / Carbon (NLM Chemicals)},
cin = {E040},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)E040-20160331},
pnm = {315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:24661667},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.12.039},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/120082},
}