Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorHacıislamoğlu, Emel
dc.contributor.authorÇınar, Yunus
dc.contributor.authorGürcan, Fatih
dc.contributor.authorCanyılmaz, Emine
dc.contributor.authorGüngör, Görkem
dc.contributor.authorYöney, Adnan
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-19T19:40:46Z
dc.date.available2020-12-19T19:40:46Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.citationHaciislamoglu, E., Cinar, Y., Gurcan, F., Canyilmaz, E., Gungor, G., & Yoney, A. (2019). Secondary cancer risk after whole-breast radiation therapy: field-in-field versus intensity modulated radiation therapy versus volumetric modulated arc therapy. The British journal of radiology, 92(1102), 20190317. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20190317
dc.identifier.citationen_US
dc.identifier.issn0007-1285
dc.identifier.issn1748-880X
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20190317
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11436/1642
dc.descriptionHaciislamoglu, Emel/0000-0003-3411-2142; GUNGOR, GORKEM/0000-0001-8164-8877en_US
dc.descriptionWOS: 000487250000020en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed: 31295011en_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: in this study, we used the concept of organ-equivalent dose (OED) to evaluate the excess absolute risk (EAR) for secondary cancer in various organs after radiation treatment for breast cancer. Methods: Using CT data set of 12 patients, we generated three different whole-breast radiation treatment plans using 50 Gy in 2Gy fractions: three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy with a field-in-field (FinF) technique, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). the OEDs were calculated from differential dose-volume histograms on the basis of the "linear-exponential," "plateau," and ''full mechanistic" dose-response models. Secondary cancer risks of the contralateral breast (CB), contralateral lung (CL), and ipsilateral lung (IL) were estimated and compared. Results: the lowest EARs for the CB, CL, and IL were achieved with FinF, which reduced the EARs by 77%, 88%. and 56% relative to those with IMRT, and by 77%, 84%, and 58% relative to those with VMAT, respectively. the secondary cancer risk for FinF was significantly lower than those of IMRT and VMAT. OED-based secondary cancer risks for CB and IL were similar when IMRT and VMAT were used, but the risk for CL was statistically lower when VMAT was used. Conclusion: the overall estimation of EAR indicated that the radiation-induced cancer risk of breast radiation therapy was lower with FinF than with IMRT and VMAT. Therefore, when secondary cancer risk is a major concern, FinF is considered to be the preferred treatment option in irradiation of whole-breast. Advances in knowledge: Secondary malignancy estimation after breast radiotherapy is becoming an important subject for comparative treatment planning.When secondary cancer risk a major concern, FinF technique is considered the preferred treatment option in whole breast patients.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherBritish Inst Radiologyen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subject[0-Belirlenecek]en_US
dc.titleSecondary cancer risk after whole-breast radiation therapy: field-in-field versus intensity modulated radiation therapy versus volumetric modulated arc therapyen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentRTEÜ, Teknik Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu, Elektronik ve Otomasyon Bölümüen_US
dc.contributor.institutionauthorÇınar, Yunus
dc.identifier.doi10.1259/bjr.20190317
dc.identifier.volume92en_US
dc.identifier.issue1102en_US
dc.ri.editoaen_US
dc.relation.journalBritish Journal of Radiologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Thumbnail

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster