scholarly journals A Prospective Investigation of Swallowing, Nutrition, and Patient-rated Functional Impact Following Altered Fractionation Radiotherapy with Concomitant Boost for Oropharyngeal Cancer

Dysphagia ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bena Cartmill ◽  
Petrea Cornwell ◽  
Elizabeth Ward ◽  
Wendy Davidson ◽  
Sandro Porceddu
Dysphagia ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 481-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bena Cartmill ◽  
Petrea Cornwell ◽  
Elizabeth Ward ◽  
Wendy Davidson ◽  
Sandro Porceddu

Head & Neck ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (8) ◽  
pp. 2099-2105
Author(s):  
Gabriel Adrian ◽  
Maria Gebre‐Medhin ◽  
Elisabeth Kjellén ◽  
Elinore Wieslander ◽  
Björn Zackrisson ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 103 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian O’Sullivan ◽  
Shao Hui Huang ◽  
Bayardo Perez-Ordonez ◽  
Christine Massey ◽  
Lillian L. Siu ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 457-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron M. Allen ◽  
Luciant Wolfsberger ◽  
Roy B. Tishler ◽  
Laurence E. Court

We set out to investigate IMRT-based concomitant boost. Eight patients with stage III/IV squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck treated with once daily with chemoradiotherapy at the Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Hospital had their treatment plans reviewed with IRB approval. Each case was replanned for treatment with a a concomitant boost regimen. Plans delivered 1.9 Gy in 30 fractions to 57 Gy with a boost of 1.5 Gy in 10 fractions for a total dose of 72 Gy. The boost was planned with both IMRT and 3-D conformal, to compare the two techniques. For each patient, both plans (IMRT-IMRT and IMRT-3DCRT) were evaluated for target and avoidance coverage, monitor units and integral dose. Finally, we evaluated the plans for time to completion. The IMRT-IMRT and IMRT-3-DCRT techniques were equivalent for target coverage. 100% coverage of the GTV and PTV was achieved with 97% of the prescription dose. Hot spots were seen 104% to 108% with IMRT-IMRT plan and from 102–111% with the IMRT-3DCRT plans. The IMRT-IMRT boost had double the monitor units as the 3-DCRT boosts. When the total monitor units from both the initial and boost portions of the plans were e combined there was not a significant differnce. There was a slight increase in integral dose with the IMRT-IMRT plans of mean 3.8%. Planning time was increased for the 3-DCRT boost as opposed to the IMRT boost (mean 3.5 hours vs. 1.5 hours). More time was needed for quality assurance of the IMRT-IMRT plans (3.0 hours vs. 1.5 hours for IMRT-3-DCRT). We found that both IMRT-based concomitant-boost strategies are achievable and produce good dosimetric results.


2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Bell ◽  
Lori D. McLeod ◽  
Lauren M. Nelson ◽  
Sheri E. Fehnel ◽  
Laurie J. Zografos ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 49 (01) ◽  
Author(s):  
W Bohr ◽  
S Lux ◽  
E Borkham-Kamphorst ◽  
E Van de Leur ◽  
M Kupper ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 44 (06) ◽  
Author(s):  
NC Gassen ◽  
Y Han ◽  
G Wochnik ◽  
F Holsboer ◽  
T Rein

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document