Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Clin Pract ; 14(3): 1085-1099, 2024 Jun 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38921264

RESUMEN

(1) Background: Head and neck cancer treatment, including advanced techniques like Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT), presents challenges for maintaining patient quality of life (QoL). Thus, thoroughly investigating how radiation therapy (RT) affects patients has been proved essential. Derived by that, this study aims to understand the complex interactions between not only RT and QoL but also symptom severity, and treatment-related toxicities in three distinct time points of patient's treatment; (2) Methods: To achieve that, EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-H&N35 questionnaires were used in combination with EORTC_RTOG scoring criteria and Spearman's rho statistical analysis for 74 patients with cancer undergoing VMAT radiation therapy; (3) Results: The results revealed a significant improvement in the Overall Health Index post-treatment, indicating a temporary decline during therapy followed by subsequent recovery, often surpassing pre-treatment QoL levels. Concurrently a reduction in symptomatology was observed, notably in pain, swallowing difficulties, and dry mouth, aligning with prior research indicating decreased symptom burden post-treatment. However, Spearman's correlation coefficient analysis at two distinct time points during therapy uncovered varying degrees of correlation between dosimetric data at Organs at Risk (OARs) and reported symptoms, highlighting potential limitations in using QoL questionnaires as sole indicators of treatment efficacy. Our investigation into the correlation between dosimetric data, toxicity, and symptoms focused on the relationship between radiation doses and oral mucositis levels, a common toxicity in head and neck cancer patients. Significant associations were identified between toxicity levels and dosimetric parameters, particularly with OARs such as the parotid glands, oral cavity, and swallowing muscles, underlining the utility of the EORTC method as a reliable toxicity assessment tool; (4) Conclusions: To summarize, current research attempts to underscore the importance of refining QoL assessments for enhanced patient care. The integration of dosimetric data, symptom severity, and treatment-related toxicities in the QoL outcomes of head and neck cancer patients undergoing VMAT radiation therapy, can lead towards the optimization of treatment strategies and the improvement of patient outcomes in future patient-centered radiation therapy practices.

2.
J Med Phys ; 49(1): 6-11, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38828066

RESUMEN

Introduction: This study aimed to investigate whether there is a dosimetric difference of implementing single instead of multi-computed tomography (CT) simulation treatment planning for high-dose-rate postoperative gynecological intracavitary brachytherapy (BT). Materials and Methods: Eighty patients were registered in the study. They received three BT fractions of 7 Gy/week (three CTs, three original plans). The organs at risk (OAR), the rectal wall, and the clinical target volume (CTV) were delineated. The delivered doses for the 2cc of OARs (D2cc), 1cc of rectal wall (D1cc), as well as for the 90% and 100% of CTV volume (DCTV90%, DCTV100%) were evaluated. To evaluate the values of the above parameters if the single-CT-simulation method has been chosen, the time of the first treatment plan was corrected for the decay and applied as the second and third CT, retrospectively, creating the next fractions (two revised plans). Results: No statistically significant (P > 0.05) differences were found between the original and revised plans for the OARs and CTV. However, for the single-CT-simulation method, it was noted that the dose constraints for the total rectal dose were exceeded in some cases (36.3%). Conclusion: The fact that rectal dose constraints were exceeded in 1/3 of patients with the single-CT-simulation method is dosimetrically significant.

3.
Cancers (Basel) ; 16(2)2024 Jan 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38254881

RESUMEN

This article presents a comprehensive review of nanoparticle-assisted treatment approaches for soft tissue sarcoma (STS). STS, a heterogeneous group of mesenchymal-origin tumors with aggressive behavior and low overall survival rates, necessitates the exploration of innovative therapeutic interventions. In contrast to conventional treatments like surgery, radiotherapy (RT), hyperthermia (HT), and chemotherapy, nanomedicine offers promising advancements in STS management. This review focuses on recent research in nanoparticle applications, including their role in enhancing RT and HT efficacy through improved drug delivery systems, novel radiosensitizers, and imaging agents. Reviewing the current state of nanoparticle-assisted therapies, this paper sheds light on their potential to revolutionize soft tissue sarcoma treatment and improve patient therapy outcomes.

4.
J Appl Clin Med Phys ; 24(9): e14051, 2023 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37344987

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the accuracy and dosimetric impact of the Acuros XB (AXB) algorithm compared to the Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) in two situations. First, simple phantom geometries were set and analyzed; moreover, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) clinical plans for Head & Neck and lung cases were calculated and compared. METHODS: First, a phantom study was performed to compare the algorithms with radiochromic EBT3 film doses using one PMMA slab phantom and two others containing foam or air gap. Subsequently, a clinical study was conducted, including 20 Head & Neck and 15 lung cases irradiated with the VMAT technique. The treatment plans calculated by AXB and AAA were evaluated in terms of planning target volume (PTV) coverage (V95% ), dose received by relevant organs at risk (OARs), and the impact of using AXB with a grid size of 1 mm. Finally, patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) was performed and compared for 17 treatment plans. RESULTS: Phantom dose calculations showed a better agreement of AXB with the film measurements. In the clinical study, AXB plans exhibited lower Conformity Index and PTV V95% , higher maximum PTV dose, and lower mean and minimum PTV doses for all anatomical sites. The most notable differences were detected in regions of intense heterogeneity. AXB predicted lower doses for the OARs, while the calculation time with a grid size of 1 mm was remarkably higher. Regarding PSQA, although AAA was found to exhibit slightly higher gamma passing rates, the difference did not affect the AXB treatment plan quality. CONCLUSIONS: AXB demonstrated higher accuracy than AAA in dose calculations of both phantom and clinical conditions, specifically in interface regions, making it suitable for sites with large heterogeneities. Hence, such dosimetric differences between the two algorithms should always be considered in clinical practice.


Asunto(s)
Radioterapia de Intensidad Modulada , Humanos , Dosificación Radioterapéutica , Radioterapia de Intensidad Modulada/métodos , Planificación de la Radioterapia Asistida por Computador/métodos , Radiometría/métodos , Algoritmos
5.
Biomedicines ; 11(3)2023 Mar 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36979740

RESUMEN

The aim of this study was to evaluate knowledge-based treatment planning (KBP) models in terms of their dosimetry and deliverability and to investigate their clinical benefits. Three H&N KBP models were built utilizing RapidPlan™, based on the dose prescription, which is given according to the planning target volume (PTV). The training set for each model consisted of 43 clinically acceptable volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans. Model quality was assessed and compared to the delivered treatment plans using the homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), structure dose difference (PTV, organ at risk-OAR), monitor units, MU factor, and complexity index. Model deliverability was assessed through a patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) gamma index-based analysis. The dosimetric assessment showed better OAR sparing for the RapidPlan™ plans and for the low- and high-risk PTV, and the HI, and CI were comparable between the clinical and RapidPlan™ plans, while for the intermediate-risk PTV, CI was better for clinical plans. The 2D gamma passing rates for RapidPlan™ plans were similar or better than the clinical ones using the 3%/3 mm gamma-index criterion. Monitor units, the MU factors, and complexity indices were found to be comparable between RapidPlan™ and the clinical plans. Knowledge-based treatment plans can be safely adapted into clinical routines, providing improved plan quality in a time efficient way while minimizing user variability.

6.
Cells ; 11(3)2022 01 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35159277

RESUMEN

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to spread worldwide with over 260 million people infected and more than 5 million deaths, numbers that are escalating on a daily basis. Frontline health workers and scientists diligently fight to alleviate life-threatening symptoms and control the spread of the disease. There is an urgent need for better triage of patients, especially in third world countries, in order to decrease the pressure induced on healthcare facilities. In the struggle to treat life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia, scientists have debated the clinical use of ionizing radiation (IR). The historical literature dating back to the 1940s contains many reports of successful treatment of pneumonia with IR. In this work, we critically review the literature for the use of IR for both diagnostic and treatment purposes. We identify details including the computed tomography (CT) scanning considerations, the radiobiological basis of IR anti-inflammatory effects, the supportive evidence for low dose radiation therapy (LDRT), and the risks of radiation-induced cancer and cardiac disease associated with LDRT. In this paper, we address concerns regarding the effective management of COVID-19 patients and potential avenues that could provide empirical evidence for the fight against the disease.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/radioterapia , Pulmón/efectos de la radiación , Neumonía Viral/radioterapia , Radiación Ionizante , SARS-CoV-2/efectos de la radiación , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/virología , Humanos , Pulmón/virología , Pandemias/prevención & control , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico , Neumonía Viral/virología , Pronóstico , Dosis de Radiación , Dosificación Radioterapéutica , Factores de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2/fisiología
7.
Biomedicines ; 9(10)2021 Oct 13.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34680578

RESUMEN

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is highly focused radiation therapy that targets well-demarcated, limited-volume malignant or benign tumors with high accuracy and precision using image guidance. Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR) applies SABR to treat cardiac arrhythmias, including ventricular tachycardia (VT) and atrial fibrillation (AF), and has recently been a focus in research. Clinical studies have demonstrated electrophysiologic conduction blockade and histologic fibrosis after STAR, which provides a proof of principle for its potential for treating arrhythmias. This review will present the basic STAR principles, available clinical study outcomes, and how the technique has evolved since the first pre-clinical study. In addition to the clinical workflow, focus will be given on the process for stereotactic radiotherapy Quality Assurance (QA) tests, as well as the need for establishing a standardized QA protocol. Future implications and potential courses of research will also be discussed.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA