Advertisement

Radiation Dose-Response Models

  • Timothy E. Schultheiss
Chapter
Part of the Medical Radiology book series (MEDRAD)

Abstract

In studying radiation responses, there are primarily two motivations. One motivation is to learn the basic mechanisms involved in the response of living tissue to radiation. The other, but not altogether different motivation, is to learn what response is likely in a human when a patient is irradiated for therapeutic (or diagnostic) purposes. Clearly these objectives are not mutually exclusive. However, both the investigators and the methods they employ are likely to be different for the two arenas of investigation. The basic research is more likely to study the mechanisms of effects and less likely to be concerned with the quantification and prediction of effects. The more clinically oriented research is likely to work at the cellular level and above, whereas the basic research generally works at the cellular level and below. In Clinical research, investigators are often interested in modeling the responses to radiation so that these responses may be predicted.

Keywords

Cell Survival Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Tumor Control Probability Cell Survival Curve Normal Tissue Injury 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akaike H (1977). On entropy maximization principle. In: Krishaiah PR (ed) Applications of statistics. North Holland, New York, pp 27–41Google Scholar
  2. Chadwick KH, Leenhouts HP (1973) A molecular theory of cell survival. Phys Med Biol 18: 78–87PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cox DR, Oakes D (1984) Analysis of survival data. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Cox DR, Snell EJ (1989) Analysis of binary data. Chapman and Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Curtis SB (1986) Lethal and potentially lethal lesions induced by radiation — a unified repair model. Radiat Res 106: 252–271PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Douglas BG, Henkelman RM, Lau GKY, Fowler JG, Eaves CJ (1979) Practical and theoretical considerations in the use of the mouse foot system to derive epithelial stem cell survival parameters. Radiat Res 77: 453–471PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Draper NR, Smith H (1981) Applied regression analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Ellis F (1963) Fractionation and dose-rate. Br J Radiol 36: 153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Finney DJ (1978) Statistical method in biological assay. Charles Griffin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Goitein M (1986) Causes and consequences of inhomogeneous dose distributions in radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 12: 701–704PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Herbert DE (1993) Quality assessment and improvement of dose response models: some effects of study weaknesses on study findings. “C’est magnifique?”. Medical Physics Publishing CoGoogle Scholar
  12. Hopewell JW, Hamlet R, Peel D (1985) The response of pig skin to single doses of irradiation from strontium-90 sources of differing surface area. Br J Radiol 58: 778–780PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (1989) Applied linear regression. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Jackson A, Kutcher GJ, Yorke ED (1993) Probability of radiation induced complications for normal tissues with parallel architecture subject to non-uniform irradiation. Med Phys 20: 613–625PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kellerer AM, Rossi HH (1971) RBE and the primary mechanism of radiation action. Radiat Res 47:15–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kutcher GJ, Burman C, Brewster L, Goitein M, Mohan R (1991) Histogram reduction method for calculating complication probabilities for three-dimensional treatment planning evaluations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 21: 137–146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lyman JT, Wolbarst AB (1987) Optimization of radiation therapy. III. A method of assessing complication probabilities from dose volume histograms. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 13: 103–109PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McCullagh P, Neider JA (1989) Generalized linear models. Chapman and Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Neary GJ (1965) Chromosone aberrations and the theory of RBE. Int Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 9:477–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nias AHW (1990) An introduction to radiobiology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Oliver R (1964) A comparison of the effects of acute and protracted gamma-radiation on the growth of seedlings of Vicia faba. II. Theoretical calculations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 8: 475–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Roberts SA, Hendry JH (1993) The delay before onset of accelerated tumor cell repopulation during radiotherapy: a direct maximum-likelihood analysis of a collection of worldwide tumor-control data. Radiother Oncol 29: 69–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schultheiss TE, Cohen L, Mansell J (1990) Normal tissue reactions and complications following high-energy neutron beam therapy. II. Complication rates adjusted for censoring. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 18: 169–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schultheiss TE, Orton CG, Peck RA (1983) Models in radiotherapy: volume effects. Med Phys 10:410–415PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schultheiss TE, Higgins EH, El-Mahdi AM (1984) The latent period in radiation myelopathy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 10: 1109–1115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schultheiss TE, Thames HD, Peters LJ, Dixon DO (1986) Effect of latency on calculated complication rates. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 12: 1861–1865PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schultheiss TE, Zagars GK, Peters LJ (1987) An explanatory hypothesis for parameter values in the LQ model for early versus late effects. Radiother Oncol 9: 241–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schultheiss TE, Stephens LC, Ang KK, Price RE, Peters LJ (1994) Volume effects in rhesus monkey spinal cord. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 29: 67–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stewart JG, Jackson AW (1975) The steepness of the dose response curve both for tumour cure and normal tissue injury. Laryngoscope 85:1107–1111PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Thames HD (1985) An “incomplete-repair” model for survival after fractionated and continuous irradiations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 47: 319–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Thames HD, Hendry JH (1987) Fractionation in radiotherapy. Taylor & Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Thames HD, Schultheiss TE, Tucker SL, Dubray BM, Hendry JH, Brock W A (1992) Can modest escalations of dose be detected as increased tumor control? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 22: 241–246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Trott K-R (1990) Cell repopulation and overall treatment time. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 19:1071–1075PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Withers HR, Thames HD, Peters LJ (1983) A new isoeffect curve for change in dose per fraction. Radiother Oncol 1:187–191PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Withers HR, Taylor JMG, Maciejewski B (1988) The hazard of accelerated tumour clonogen repopulation during radiotherapy. Acta Oncol 27: 131–146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wong CS, Mivkiv S, Hill RP (1992) Linear-quadratic model underestimates sparing effects of small doses per fraction in rat spinal cord. Radiother Oncol 23:176–184PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zagars GK, Schultheiss TE, Peters LJ (1987) Inter-tumor heterogeneity and radiation dose control curves. Radiother Oncol 8: 353–362PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Timothy E. Schultheiss
    • 1
  1. 1.Radiation OncologyFox Chase Cancer CenterPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations