Normal Tissue Response to Radiation: Experimental

  • J. Denekamp
Conference paper


The effectiveness of radiotherapy in treating cancer is limited by the reaction of the normal tissues inevitably included in the beam. Thus the prescribed dose is actually determined by normal tissue tolerance rather than by the type or size of tumour that is being treated. This is recognized in the many fractionation formulae, such as nominal standard dose (NSD) or cumulative radiation effect (CRE) calculations, for determining the total dose in two schedules that will give equivalent normal tissue damage (isoeffective doses). The challenge is then to find methods of changing radiotherapy practice in a way that allows an increase in the effect on the tumour whilst maintaining an isoeffective exposure of normal tissues. This is the aim in chemical modification of response with tumour radiosensitizers or normal tissue radioprotectors, with accelerated or hyperfractionation and with adjuvant therapy involving cytotoxic drugs or hyperthermia.


Cell Cycle Time Identical Style Mitotic Delay Tumour Radiosensitizers Normal Tissue Tolerance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adams GE, Fowler JF, Wardman P (eds) (1978) Hypoxic cell sensitizers in radiobiology and radiotherapy. Proceedings of the 8th LH Gray Conference. Br J Cancer 37 [Suppl III]Google Scholar
  2. Alper T (1979) Cellular radiobiology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Chapman JD, Whitmore GJ (eds) (1984) Chemical modifiers of cancer treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys [Special Issue] 10: 1161–1812Google Scholar
  4. Curtis SB (1986) Lethal and potentially lethal lesions induced by radiation — a unified repair model. Radiat Res 106: 252–270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Denekamp J (1982) Cell kinetics and cancer therapy. CC Thomas, Springfield, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  6. Denekamp J (1984) Normal tissue radioprotection by WR2721. In: Breccia A, Greenstock, CL, Tamba M (eds) Advances on oxygen radicals and radioprotectors. Lo Scarabro, Bologna, pp 153–172Google Scholar
  7. Denekamp J (1986) Cell kinetics and radiation biology. Int J Radiat Biol 49: 357–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Denekamp J, Fowler JF (1977) Cell proliferation kinetics and radiation therapy. In: Becker FF (ed) Cancer: a comprehensive treatise. Plenum, New York, pp 101–128Google Scholar
  9. Dethlefson LA, Dewey WC (eds) (1982) Cancer therapy by hyperthermia, drugs and radiation. National Cancer Institutes Monograph 61Google Scholar
  10. Douglas BG, Fowler JF (1976) The effect of multiple small doses of X-rays on skin reactions in the mouse and a basic interpretation. Radiat Res 66: 401–426PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Field SB (1976) An historical survey of radiobiology and radiotherapy with fast neutrons. Curr Top Radiat Res 11: 1–86Google Scholar
  12. Fowler JF (1981) Nuclear particles in cancer treatment. Adam Hilger, Bristol (Medical Physics Handbooks 8 )Google Scholar
  13. Fowler JF (1984) What next in fractionated radiotherapy? Br J Cancer 49: 285–300Google Scholar
  14. Hall EJ (1978) Radiobiology for the radiologist. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Hendry JH, Potten CS, Moore JV, Hume WJ (eds) (1986) Assays of normal tissue injury, and their cellular interpretation. Br J Cancer 53 [Suppl VII]Google Scholar
  16. Henk JM (1981) Does hyperbaric oxygen have a future in radiation therapy? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 7: 1125–1128PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hill SA, Denekamp J (1987) Therapeutic benefit from combined heat and radiation. In: Streffer C (ed) Hyperthermia and the therapy of malignant tumours. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (Recent results in cancer research, vol 104 )Google Scholar
  18. Hornsey S (1973) The effectiveness of fast neutrons compared with low LET radiation on cell survival measured in the mouse jejunun. Radiat Res 55: 58–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nygaard OF, Simic MG (eds) (1983) Radioprotectors and anticarcinogens. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Potten CS, Hendry JH (eds) (1985) Manual of mammalian cell techniques. Churchill Livingstone, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  21. Raju, M (1980) Heavy particle radiotherapy. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Rubin P, Casarett GW (1968) Clinical radiation pathology, vols 1 and 2. Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  23. Sinclair WK (1972) Cell cycle dependence of the lethal radiation response in mammalian cells. Curr Top Radiat Res 7: 264–285Google Scholar
  24. Stewart FA, Denekamp J, Randhawa VS (1982) Skin sensitization by misonidazole: a demonstration of uniform mild hypoxia. Br J Cancer 48:869–877Google Scholar
  25. Stewart FA, Soranson J, Alpen EL, Williams MV, Denekamp J (1984) Radiation-induced renal damage. The effects of hyperfractionation. Radiat Res 98: 407–420Google Scholar
  26. Sutherland RM (1982) Chemical modification: radiation and cytotoxic drugs. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 8: 323–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thames HD, Hendry JH (eds) (1987) Fractionation in radiotherapy. Taylor & Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  28. Withers HR, Peters LJ, Thames HD, Fletcher GH (1982) Hyperfractionation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 8: 1807–1809 (editorial)Google Scholar
  29. Yuhas JM, Spellman JM, Culo F (1980) The role of WR 2721 in radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. Cancer Clin Trials 3: 211–216PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Denekamp

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations