2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2009.05.024
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inter-clinician variability in making dosimetric decisions in pediatric treatment: A balance between efficacy and late effects

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A historical study concluded that doses below 10 Gy failed to cause permanent vertebral deformity [33]. Stature loss was weakly related to heterogeneous vertebral body dose [34]. Thus, the advantage of reduced stature loss with PrT (6.8 cm) compared with 3DCRT (23.2 cm), predicted by vertebral dose, may not exist as both modalities delivered vertebral doses heterogeneously [18].…”
Section: ããmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A historical study concluded that doses below 10 Gy failed to cause permanent vertebral deformity [33]. Stature loss was weakly related to heterogeneous vertebral body dose [34]. Thus, the advantage of reduced stature loss with PrT (6.8 cm) compared with 3DCRT (23.2 cm), predicted by vertebral dose, may not exist as both modalities delivered vertebral doses heterogeneously [18].…”
Section: ããmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, as mentioned previously, the systematic target delineation uncertainty was not included in the PTV margin calculation in this study. Estimating inter-observer delineation variability for pediatric cases is even more difficult than for adults as a result of the small number of patients treated in each center, the broad spectrum of pediatric tumors, the lack of common guidelines and the individual patient's specific needs [39,40]. Thus, for the assessment of the exact PTV expansion, an estimation of the delineation uncertainty and a larger patient cohort would be necessary for both workflows.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Equally important is the accurate characterization of RT dose-volume constraints and toxicity risk specific to the kidney(s) and liver, which represent the primary OARs constrained in RT planning. As demonstrated in Tables II and V [9,15,17,[19][20][21][22][23], there remains significant variability in OAR constraint parameters across recent protocols and institutions. These constraints appreciably influence the delivery and design of RT, yet are not based on toxicity data specific to children with neuroblastoma.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%