Radiation and Environmental Biophysics

, Volume 44, Issue 3, pp 235–239 | Cite as

Radiation risk estimates after radiotherapy: application of the organ equivalent dose concept to plateau dose–response relationships

Short Communication

Abstract

Estimates of secondary cancer risk after radiotherapy are becoming more important for comparative treatment planning. Modern treatment planning systems provide accurate three-dimensional (3D) dose distributions for each individual patient. The dose distributions can be converted into organ equivalent doses to describe radiation-induced cancer after radiotherapy (OEDrad-ther) in the irradiated organs. The OEDrad-ther concept assumes that any two dose distributions in an organ are equivalent if they cause the same radiation-induced cancer risk. In this work, this concept is applied to dose–response relationships, which are leveling off at high dose. The organ-dependent operational parameter of this dose–response relationship was estimated by analyzing secondary cancer incidence data of patients with Hodgkin’s disease. The dose distributions of a typical radiotherapy treatment plan for treating Hodgkin’s disease was reconstructed. Dose distributions were calculated in individual organs from which cancer incidence data were available. The model parameter was obtained by comparing dose and cancer incidence rates for the individual organs.

References

  1. 1.
    Hall EJ. Henry S. (2004) The crooked shall be made straight; dose-response relationships for carcinogenesis (Kaplan Distinguished Scientist Award 2003). Int J Radiat Biol 80(5):327–337CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schneider U, Zwahlen D, Ross D, Kaser-Hotz B (2005) Estimation of radiation induced cancer from 3D-dose distributions: concept of organ equivalent dose. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 61:1510–1515CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    ICRP (1991) Recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection. Publication 60, Annals of the ICRP 21(1-3). Pergamon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schneider U, Kaser-Hotz B (2005) A simple dose-response relationship for modelling secondary cancer incidence after radiotherapy. Z Med Phys 15(1):31–37PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Broerse JJ. (1999) Radiation induced cancer in animals. In: Baumstark-Khan C et al. (ed) Fundamentals for the assessment of risks from environmental radiation. Kluver, Dordrecht, pp. 379–388Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mole RH (1984) Dose-response relationships. In: Boice JD, Fraumeni JF (eds) Radiation carcinogenesis: epidemiology and biological significance. Raven, New York pp. 403–420Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hall EJ, Wuu CS (2003) Radiation-induced second cancers: the impact of 3D-CRT and IMRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 56(1):83–88Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davis RH (2004) Production and killing of second cancer precursor cells in radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 59(3):916CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schneider U (2005) Dose-response relationship for radiation-induced cancer-decrease or plateau at high dose. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 61(1):312–313CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    UNSCEAR (2000) Report to the general assembly, sources and effects of ionizing radiation, Volume II: Effects, Annex I: Epidemiological evaluation of radiation-induced cancer. http://www.unscear.org/reports/2000_2.htmlGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thomson D, Mabuchi K, Ron E, Soda M, Tokunaga M, Ochikubo S, Sugimoto S, Ikeda T, Terasaki M, Izumi S, Preston D (1994) Cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors. Part II: Solid tumors, 1958-1987. Rad Res 137:S17–S67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    van Leeuwen FE, Travis LB (2001) Second cancers. In: DeVita VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA (eds) Cancer: principles and practice of oncology, 6th edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 2939–2964Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Preston D, Shimizu Y, Pierce D, Suyama A, Mabuchi K (2003) Studies of mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 13: solid cancer and noncancer disease mortality: 1950-1997. Rad Res 160:381–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    van Leeuwen FE, Klokman WJ, Veer MB, et al (2000) Long-term risk of second malignancy in survivors of Hodgkin’s disease treated during adolescence or young adulthood. J Clin Oncol 18:487–497PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zubal IG, Harrell CR, Smith EO, et al. (1994) Computerized three-dimensional segmented human anatomy. Med Phys 21(2):299–302CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mauch PM, Leslie AK, Kadin M, et al. (1993) Patterns of presentation of Hodgkin disease. Cancer. 71(6):2062–2071PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hoppe RT (1990) Radiation therapy in the management of Hodgkin’s disease. Semin Oncol 17(6):704–715PubMedMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Medical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology and Nuclear Medicine City Hospital ZürichZürichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Diagnostic Imaging and Radio-OncologyVetsuisse Faculty of the University of ZürichZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations