Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background/aim: To investigate dosimetric differences in organs at risk (OARs) and cardiac substructures in patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) between the adaptive radiotherapy (ART) and non-ART groups.
Patients And Methods: Thirty patients were treated with definitive radiotherapy +/- chemotherapy. Cardiac substructures including the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) and large vessels, were contoured. Eight patients experienced tumor shrinkage and were replanned (ART). Cumulative plans after ART were compared to the original plans (not considering volume reduction) in terms of dosimetric parameters. The cumulative plans of the ART group (n=8) and non-ART group (n=22) were compared in terms of the same dosimetric parameters.
Results: Within the ART group, the following parameters were found to be significantly improved after re-planning: mean lung dose (MLD) (13.79 Gy vs. 15.6 Gy), V20Gy both lungs (17.88% vs. 27.38%), ipsilateral MLD (20.87 Gy vs. 24.44 Gy), and esophagus mean dose (20.79 Gy vs. 24.2 Gy). No dosimetric differences were observed in heart substructures. Dosimetric parameters, particularly LAD, were significantly worse in the ART group than in the non-ART group. This is probably because this OAR was not considered in the plan optimization after re-planning, because it was not routinely contoured as an OAR.
Conclusion: Our analysis showed an improvement in dosimetric parameters in the lungs and esophagus in the ART group. This approach may lead to a possible reduction in toxicity. Contouring of cardiac substructures could lead to a plan optimization of their parameters and eventually reduce the risk of cardiac toxicities in these patients.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.16759 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!