| 001 | 120082 | ||
| 005 | 20240228135011.0 | ||
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.12.039 |2 doi |
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a pmid:24661667 |2 pmid |
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a 0360-3016 |2 ISSN |
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a 1879-355X |2 ISSN |
| 037 | _ | _ | |a DKFZ-2017-00669 |
| 041 | _ | _ | |a eng |
| 082 | _ | _ | |a 610 |
| 100 | 1 | _ | |a Gillmann, Clarissa |b 0 |
| 245 | _ | _ | |a Temporal lobe reactions after carbon ion radiation therapy: comparison of relative biological effectiveness-weighted tolerance doses predicted by local effect models I and IV.15 |
| 260 | _ | _ | |a Amsterdam [u.a.] |c 2014 |b Elsevier Science |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a article |2 DRIVER |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a Output Types/Journal article |2 DataCite |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a Journal Article |b journal |m journal |0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16 |s 1490789204_9393 |2 PUB:(DE-HGF) |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a ARTICLE |2 BibTeX |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE |2 ORCID |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a Journal Article |0 0 |2 EndNote |
| 520 | _ | _ | |a 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. |
| 536 | _ | _ | |a 315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315) |0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315 |c POF3-315 |f POF III |x 0 |
| 588 | _ | _ | |a Dataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed, |
| 650 | _ | 7 | |a Ions |2 NLM Chemicals |
| 650 | _ | 7 | |a Carbon |0 7440-44-0 |2 NLM Chemicals |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Jäkel, Oliver |0 P:(DE-He78)440a3f62ea9ea5c63375308976fc4c44 |b 1 |u dkfz |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Schlampp, Ingmar |b 2 |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Karger, Christian |0 P:(DE-He78)b43076fb0a30230e4323887c0c980046 |b 3 |e Last author |u dkfz |
| 773 | _ | _ | |a 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.12.039 |g Vol. 88, no. 5, p. 1136 - 1141 |0 PERI:(DE-600)1500486-7 |n 5 |p 1136 - 1141 |t International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics |v 88 |y 2014 |x 0360-3016 |
| 909 | C | O | |o oai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:120082 |p VDB |
| 910 | 1 | _ | |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum |0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0 |k DKFZ |b 1 |6 P:(DE-He78)440a3f62ea9ea5c63375308976fc4c44 |
| 910 | 1 | _ | |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum |0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0 |k DKFZ |b 3 |6 P:(DE-He78)b43076fb0a30230e4323887c0c980046 |
| 913 | 1 | _ | |a DE-HGF |l Krebsforschung |1 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-310 |0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315 |2 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-300 |v Imaging and radiooncology |x 0 |4 G:(DE-HGF)POF |3 G:(DE-HGF)POF3 |b Gesundheit |
| 914 | 1 | _ | |y 2014 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a Nationallizenz |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0420 |2 StatID |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a JCR |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100 |2 StatID |b INT J RADIAT ONCOL : 2015 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200 |2 StatID |b SCOPUS |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300 |2 StatID |b Medline |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0310 |2 StatID |b NCBI Molecular Biology Database |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0600 |2 StatID |b Ebsco Academic Search |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a Peer Review |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030 |2 StatID |b ASC |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199 |2 StatID |b Thomson Reuters Master Journal List |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a WoS |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0110 |2 StatID |b Science Citation Index |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150 |2 StatID |b Web of Science Core Collection |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a WoS |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0111 |2 StatID |b Science Citation Index Expanded |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1110 |2 StatID |b Current Contents - Clinical Medicine |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1050 |2 StatID |b BIOSIS Previews |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a IF < 5 |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900 |2 StatID |
| 920 | 1 | _ | |0 I:(DE-He78)E040-20160331 |k E040 |l Medizinische Physik in der Strahlentherapie |x 0 |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a journal |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a VDB |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a I:(DE-He78)E040-20160331 |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a UNRESTRICTED |
| Library | Collection | CLSMajor | CLSMinor | Language | Author |
|---|
guest ::