AAPM Task Group Report 267: A joint AAPM GEC-ESTRO report on biophysical models and tools for the planning and evaluation of brachytherapy.
biophysical modeling
brachytherapy
radiobiology
Journal
Medical physics
ISSN: 2473-4209
Titre abrégé: Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0425746
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 May 2024
09 May 2024
Historique:
revised:
28
02
2024
received:
05
12
2023
accepted:
08
03
2024
medline:
9
5
2024
pubmed:
9
5
2024
entrez:
9
5
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Brachytherapy utilizes a multitude of radioactive sources and treatment techniques that often exhibit widely different spatial and temporal dose delivery patterns. Biophysical models, capable of modeling the key interacting effects of dose delivery patterns with the underlying cellular processes of the irradiated tissues, can be a potentially useful tool for elucidating the radiobiological effects of complex brachytherapy dose delivery patterns and for comparing their relative clinical effectiveness. While the biophysical models have been used largely in research settings by experts, it has also been used increasingly by clinical medical physicists over the last two decades. A good understanding of the potentials and limitations of the biophysical models and their intended use is critically important in the widespread use of these models. To facilitate meaningful and consistent use of biophysical models in brachytherapy, Task Group 267 (TG-267) was formed jointly with the American Association of Physics in Medicine (AAPM) and The Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie and the European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) to review the existing biophysical models, model parameters, and their use in selected brachytherapy modalities and to develop practice guidelines for clinical medical physicists regarding the selection, use, and interpretation of biophysical models. The report provides an overview of the clinical background and the rationale for the development of biophysical models in radiation oncology and, particularly, in brachytherapy; a summary of the results of literature review of the existing biophysical models that have been used in brachytherapy; a focused discussion of the applications of relevant biophysical models for five selected brachytherapy modalities; and the task group recommendations on the use, reporting, and implementation of biophysical models for brachytherapy treatment planning and evaluation. The report concludes with discussions on the challenges and opportunities in using biophysical models for brachytherapy and with an outlook for future developments.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Références
Li X, Alber M, Deasy JO, et al. The use and QA of biologically related models for treatment planning: short report of the TG‐166 of the therapy physics committee of the AAPM. Med Phys. 2012;39:1386‐1409.
Hall EJ, Giaccia AJ. Radiobiology for Radiologists. 7th ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2012.
Dale R, Jones B. Radiobiological Modelling in Radiation Oncology. British Institute of Radiology; 2007.
Dale RG. The BJR and progress in radiobiological modelling. Br J Radiol. 2010;83:544‐545.
Fowler JF. The linear‐quadratic formula and progress in fractionated radiotherapy. Br J Radiol. 1989;62:679‐694.
Carlson DJ, Chen ZJ, Hoskin PJ, Ouhib Z, Zaider M. Radiobiology for brachytherapy. In: Venselaar JLM, Baltas D, Hoskin P, Meigooni AS, eds. Comprehensive Brachytherapy: Physics and Clinical Aspects. Taylor & Francis Group; 2013.
ICRU Report 89: prescribing recording, and reporting brachytherapy for cancer of the cervix. J ICRU. 2013;13:89‐104.
Waterman FM, Yue N, Corn BW, Dicker AP. Edema associated with I‐125 or Pd‐103 prostate brachytherapy and its impact on post‐implant dosimetry: an analysis based on serial CT acquisition. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998;41:1069‐1077.
Chen Z, Deng J, Roberts K, Nath R. Potential impact of prostate edema on the dosimetry of permanent seed implants using the new 131Cs (model CS‐1) seeds. Med Phys. 2006;33:968‐975.
Nath R, Bice WS, Butler WM, et al. AAPM recommendations on dose prescription and reporting methods for permanent interstitial brachytherapy for prostate cancer: report of Task Group 137. Med Phys. 2009;36:5310‐5322.
Yoshioka Y, Konishi K, Sumida I, et al. Monotherapeutic high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: five‐year results of an extreme hypofractionation regimen with 54 Gy in nine fractions. Int J Radiat Biol Phys. 2011;80:469‐475.
Krauss DJ, Ye H, Martinez AA, et al. Favorable preliminary outcomes for men with low‐ and intermediate‐risk prostate cancer treated with 19 Gy single fraction high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Biol Phys. 2017;97:98‐106.
Prada PJ, Ferri M, Cardenal J, et al. High‐dose‐rate interstitial brachytherapy as monotherapy in one fraction of 20.5 Gy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: toxicity and 6‐year biochemical results. Brachytherapy. 2018;17:845‐851.
Ashida S, Yamasaki I, Tamura K, et al. Feasibility and early outcome of high‐dose‐rate Ir‐192 brachytherapy as monotherapy in two fractions within 1 day for high‐/very high‐risk prostate cancer. Mol Clin Oncol. 2016;4:789‐793.
Prada PJ, Cardenal J, Blanco AG, et al. High‐dose‐rate interstitial brachytherapy as monotherapy in one fraction for the treatment of favorable stage prostate cancer: toxicity and long‐term biochemical results. Radiother Oncol. 2016;119:411‐416.
Shah C, Vicini F, Shaitelman SF, et al. The American Brachytherapy Society consensus statement for accelerated partial‐breast irradiation. Brachytherapy. 2018;17:154‐170.
Jethwa KR, Park SS, Gonuguntla K, et al. Three‐fraction intracavitary accelerated partial breast brachytherapy: early provider and patient‐reported outcomes of a novel regimen. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019;104:75‐82.
Chiu‐Tsao ST, Astrahan MA, Finger PT, et al. Dosimetry of (125)I and (103)Pd COMS eye plaques for intraocular tumors: report of Task Group 129 by the AAPM and ABS. Med Phys. 2012;39:6161‐6184.
Galelli M, Feroldi P. The time variable dose‐rate in HDR stepping source brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol. 1993;27:173‐174.
Van Limbergen E, Joiner MC, Van der Kogel AJ, Dorr W. Radiobiology of LDR, HDR, PDR and VLDR Brachytherapy. 2nd ed. ESTRO; 2015.
Chadwick KH, Leenhouts HP. The Molecular Theory of Radiation Biology. Springer‐Verlag; 1981.
Barendsen GW. Dose fractionation, dose rate and iso‐effect relationships for normal tissue responses. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1982;8:1981‐1997.
Thames HD Jr, Withers HR, Peters LJ, Fletcher GH. Changes in early and late radiation responses with altered dose fractionation: implications for dose‐survival relationships. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1982;8:219‐226.
Bodgi L, Canet A, Pujo‐Menjouet L, Lesne A, Victor JM, Foray N. Mathematical models of radiation action on living cells: from the target theory to the modern approaches. A historical and critical review. J Theor Biol. 2016;394:93‐101.
Lea DE. Actions of Radiations on Living Cells. Cambridge University Press; 1946.
Lea DE, Catcheside DG. The mechanism of the induction by radiation of chromosome aberrations in Tradescantia. J Genet. 1942;44:216‐245.
Elkind MM, Whitmore GF, American Institute of Biological Sciences. The Radiobiology of Cultured Mammalian Cells. Gordon and Breach; 1967.
Kellerer AM, Rossi HH. A generalized formulation of dual radiation action. Radiat Res. 1978;75:471‐488.
Dale RG. The application of the linear‐quadratic dose‐effect equation to fractionated and protracted radiotherapy. Br J Radiol. 1985;58:515‐528.
Dale RG. The application of the linear‐quadratic model to fractionated radiotherapy when there is incomplete normal tissue recovery between fractions, and possible implications for treatments involving multiple fractions per day. Br J Radiol. 1986;59:919‐927.
Dale RG. Radiobiological assessment of permanent implants using tumour repopulation factors in the linear‐quadratic model. Br J Radiol. 1989;62:241‐244.
Dale RG, Huczkowski J, Trott KR. Possible dose rate dependence of recovery kinetics as deduced from a preliminary analysis of the effects of fractionated irradiations at varying dose rates. Br J Radiol. 1988;61:153‐157.
Tobias CA. The repair‐misrepair model in radiobiology: comparison to other models. Radiat Res. 1985;8:S77‐S95.
Curtis SB. Lethal and potentially lethal lesions induced by radiation—a unified repair model. Radiat Res. 1986;106:252‐270.
Goodhead DT. Saturable repair models of radiation action in mammalian cells. Radiat Res. 1985;8:S58‐S67.
Zaider M, Minerbo GN. Tumour control probability: a formulation applicable to any temporal protocol of dose delivery. Phys Med Biol. 2000;45:279‐293.
Carlson DJ, Stewart RD, Semenenko VA, Sandison GA. Combined use of Monte Carlo DNA damage simulations and deterministic repair models to examine putative mechanisms of cell killing. Radiat Res. 2008;169:447‐459.
Withers HR, Taylor JM, Maciejewski B. Treatment volume and tissue tolerance. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1988;14:751‐759.
Takam R, Bezak E, Yeoh EE, Marcu L. Assessment of normal tissue complications following prostate cancer irradiation: comparison of radiation treatment modalities using NTCP models. Med Phys. 2010;37:5126‐5137.
D'Andrea M, Benassi M, Strigari L. Modeling radiotherapy induced normal tissue complications: an overview beyond phenomenological models. Comput Math Methods Med. 2016;2016:2796186.
Nath R, Bongiorni P, Chen Z, Gragnano J, Rockwell S. Development of a rat solid tumor model for continuous low‐dose‐rate irradiation studies using 125I and 103Pd sources. Brachytherapy. 2004;3:159‐172.
Arnfield MR, Lin PS, Manning MA, et al. The effect of high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy dwell sequence on cell survival. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;52:850‐857.
Dale RG, Jones B. The clinical radiobiology of brachytherapy. Br J Radiol. 1998;71:465‐483.
Zaider M, Hanin L. Biologically‐equivalent dose and long‐term survival time in radiation treatments. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52:6355‐6362.
Bentzen SM, Constine LS, Deasy JO, et al. Quantitative Analyses of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic (QUANTEC): an introduction to the scientific issues. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;76:S3‐S9.
Cox DR. Regression models and life‐tables. J R Stat Soc B. 1972;34:187‐202.
Cox C, Chu H, Schneider MF, Munoz A. Parametric survival analysis and taxonomy of hazard functions for the generalized gamma distribution. Stat Med. 2007;26:4352‐4374.
Brenner DJ, Hlatky LR, Hahnfeldt PJ, Huang Y, Sachs RK. The linear‐quadratic model and most other common radiobiological models result in similar predictions of time‐dose relationships. Radiat Res. 1998;150:83‐91.
McMahon SJ. The linear quadratic model: usage, interpretation and challenges. Phys Med Biol. 2018;64:01TR01.
Brenner DJ. Radiation biology in brachytherapy. J Surg Oncol. 1997;65:66‐70.
Thames HD, Hendry JH. Fractionation in Radiotherapy. Taylor and Francis; 1987.
Chargari C, Van Limbergen E, Mahantshetty U, Deutsch E, Haie‐Meder C. Radiobiology of brachytherapy: the historical view based on linear quadratic model and perspectives for optimization. Cancer Radiother. 2018;22:312‐318.
Sachs RK, Hahnfeld P, Brenner DJ. The link between low‐LET dose‐response relations and the underlying kinetics of damage production/repair/misrepair. Int J Radiat Biol. 1997;72:351‐374.
Zaider M. There is no mechanistic basis for the use of the linear‐quadratic expression in cellular survival analysis. Med Phys. 1998;25:791‐792.
Zaider M. Sequel to the discussion concerning the mechanistic basis of the linear quadratic formalism. Med Phys. 1998;25:2074‐2075.
Sachs RK, Brenner DJ. The mechanistic basis of the linear‐quadratic formalism. Med Phys. 1998;25:2071‐2073.
Chadwick KH, Leenhouts HP. A molecular theory of cell survival. Phys Med Biol. 1973;18:78‐87.
Haustermans KM, Hofland I, Van Poppel H. Cell kinetic measurements in prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;37:1067‐1070.
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Fractionated high dose rate versus low dose rate regimens for intracavitary brachytherapy of the cervix. I. General considerations based on radiobiology. Br J Radiol. 1991;64:133‐141.
Nilsson P, Thames HD, Joiner MC. A generalized formulation of the ‘incomplete‐repair’ model for cell survival and tissue response to fractionated low dose‐rate irradiation. Int J Radiat Biol. 1990;57:127‐142.
Joiner MC, Marples B, Lambin P, Short SC, Turesson I. Low‐dose hypersensitivity: current status and possible mechanisms. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;49:379‐389.
Mothersill C, Seymour C. Radiation‐induced bystander effects: past history and future directions. Radiat Res. 2001;155:759‐767.
Bentzen SM, Thames HD. Clinical evidence for tumor clonogen regeneration: interpretations of the data. Radiother Oncol. 1991;22:161‐166.
Bedford JS, Hall EJ. Threshold hypoxia: its effect on the survival of mammalian cells irradiated at high and low dose‐rates. Br J Radiol. 1966;39:896‐900.
Ling CC, Spiro IJ, Mitchell J, Stickler R. The variation of OER with dose rate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1985;11:1367‐1373.
Dasu A, Denekamp J. New insights into factors influencing the clinically relevant oxygen enhancement ratio. Radiother Oncol. 1998;46:269‐277.
Nahum AE, Movsas B, Horwitz EM, Stobbe CC, Chapman JD. Incorporating clinical measurements of hypoxia into tumor local control modeling of prostate cancer: implications for the α/β ratio. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;57:391‐401.
Carlson DJ, Stewart RD, Semenenko VA. Effects of oxygen on intrinsic radiation sensitivity: a test of the relationship between aerobic and hypoxic linear‐quadratic (LQ) model parameters. Med Phys. 2006;33:3105‐3115.
Carlson DJ, Keall PJ, Loo BW, Jr., Chen ZJ, Brown JM. Hypofractionation results in reduced tumor cell kill compared to conventional fractionation for tumors with regions of hypoxia. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;79:1188‐1195.
Hockel M, Schlenger K, Hockel S, Aral B, Schaffer U, Vaupel P. Tumor hypoxia in pelvic recurrences of cervical cancer. Int J Cancer. 1998;79:365‐369.
Knocke TH, Weitmann HD, Feldmann HJ, Selzer E, Potter R. Intratumoral pO2‐measurements as predictive assay in the treatment of carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Radiother Oncol. 1999;53:99‐104.
Sundfor K, Lyng H, Trope CG, Rofstad EK. Treatment outcome in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix: relationships to pretreatment tumor oxygenation and vascularization. Radiother Oncol. 2000;54:101‐107.
Thames HD Jr. Effect‐independent measures of tissue responses to fractionated irradiation. Int J Radiat Biol Relat Stud Phys Chem Med. 1984;45:1‐10.
Thames HD. Repair kinetics in tissues: alternative models. Radiother Oncol. 1989;14:321‐327.
Steel GG, Deacon JM, Duchesne GM, Horwich A, Kelland LR, Peacock JH. The dose‐rate effect in human tumour cells. Radiother Oncol. 1987;9:299‐310.
Nelson JM, Braby LA, Metting NF, Roesch WC. Multiple components of split‐dose repair in plateau‐phase mammalian cells: a new challenge for phenomenological modelers. Radiat Res. 1990;121:154‐160.
van Rongen E, Thames HD Jr, Travis EL. Recovery from radiation damage in mouse lung: interpretation in terms of two rates of repair. Radiat Res. 1993;133:225‐233.
Stewart RD. Two‐lesion kinetic model of double‐strand break rejoining and cell killing. Radiat Res. 2001;156:365‐378.
Fowler JF. Is repair of DNA strand break damage from ionizing radiation second‐order rather than first‐order? A simpler explanation of apparently multiexponential repair. Radiat Res. 1999;152:124‐136.
Dale RG. Radiation repair models for clinical application. Br J Radiol. 2018;92:20180070.
Guerrero M, Li XA. Extending the linear‐quadratic model for large fraction doses pertinent to stereotactic radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol. 2004;49:4825‐4835.
Brenner DJ. The linear‐quadratic model is an appropriate methodology for determining isoeffective doses at large doses per fraction. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2008;18:234‐239.
Dutreix J, Cosset JM, Girinsky T. [Biological equivalency of high single doses used in intraoperative irradiation]. Bulletin du cancer Radiotherapie. 1990;77:125‐134.
Park C, Papiez L, Zhang S, Story M, Timmerman RD. Universal survival curve and single fraction equivalent dose: useful tools in understanding potency of ablative radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Physics. 2008;70:847‐852.
Hanin LG, Zaider M. Cell‐survival probability at large doses: an alternative to the linear‐quadratic model. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:4687‐4702.
Carlone M, Wilkins D, Raaphorst P. The modified linear‐quadratic model of Guerrero and Li can be derived from a mechanistic basis and exhibits linear‐quadratic‐linear behaviour. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50:L9‐L13. author reply L13–L15.
Guerrero M, Carlone M. Mechanistic formulation of a lineal‐quadratic‐linear (LQL) model: split‐dose experiments and exponentially decaying sources. Med Phys. 2010;37:4173‐4181.
Garcia‐Barros M, Paris F, Cordon‐Cardo C, et al. Tumor response to radiotherapy regulated by endothelial cell apoptosis. Science. 2003;300:1155‐1159.
Brenner DJ, Hlatky LR, Hahnfeldt PJ, Hall EJ, Sachs RK. A convenient extension of the linear‐quadratic model to include redistribution and reoxygenation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995;32:379‐390.
Zaider M, Minerbo GN. A mathematical model for cell cycle progression under continuous low‐dose‐rate irradiation. Radiat Res. 1993;133:20‐26.
Zaider M, Wuu CS, Minerbo GN. The combined effects of sublethal damage repair, cellular repopulation and redistribution in the mitotic cycle. I. Survival probabilities after exposure to radiation. Radiat Res. 1996;145:457‐466.
Zaider M. The combined effects of sublethal damage repair, cellular repopulation and redistribution in the mitotic cycle. II. The dependency of radiosensitivity parameters α, β and t(0) on biological age for Chinese hamster V79 cells. Radiat Res. 1996;145:467‐473.
Guerrero M, Carlson DJ. A radiobiological model of reoxygenation and fractionation effects. Med Phys. 2017;44:2002‐2010.
Brenner DJ, Leu CS, Beatty JF, Shefer RE. Clinical relative biological effectiveness of low‐energy x‐rays emitted by miniature x‐ray devices. Phys Med Biol. 1999;44:323‐333.
Wuu CS, Kliauga P, Amols HI. Microdosimetric evaluation of relative biological effectiveness for 103Pd, 125I, 241Am, and 192Ir brachytherapy sources. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;36:689‐697.
Nath R, Bongiorni P, Chen Z, Gragnano J, Rockwell S. Relative biological effectiveness of 103Pd and 125I photons for continuous low‐dose‐rate irradiation of Chinese hamster cells. Radiat Res. 2005;163:501‐509.
Ling CC, Li WX, Anderson LL. The relative biological effectiveness of I‐125 and Pd‐103. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995;32:373‐378.
Famulari G, Pater P, Enger SA. Microdosimetric evaluation of current and alternative brachytherapy sources—a Geant4‐DNA simulation study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018;100:270‐277.
Dale RG, Jones B. The assessment of RBE effects using the concept of biologically effective dose. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;43:639‐645.
Fowler JF. 21 years of biologically effective dose. Br J Radiol. 2010;83:554‐568.
Dale RG. The use of small fraction numbers in high dose‐rate gynaecological afterloading: some radiobiological considerations. Br J Radiol. 1990;63:290‐294.
Dale RG, Jones B, Coles IP. Effect of tumour shrinkage on the biological effectiveness of permanent brachytherapy implants. Br J Radiol. 1994;67:639‐645.
Ling CC, Roy J, Sahoo N, Wallner K, Anderson L. Quantifying the effect of dose inhomogeneity in brachytherapy: application to permanent prostatic implant with 125I seeds. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1994;28:971‐978.
Dale RG, Coles IP, Deehan C, O'Donoghue JA. Calculation of integrated biological response in brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;38:633‐642.
Ling CC. Permanent implants using Au‐198, Pd‐103 and I‐125: radiobiological considerations based on the linear quadratic model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1992;23:81‐87.
Lazarescu GR, Battista JJ. Analysis of the radiobiology of ytterbium‐169 and iodine‐125 permanent brachytherapy implants. Phys Med Biol. 1997;42:1727‐1736.
Dicker AP, Lin CC, Leeper DB, Waterman FM. Isotope selection for permanent prostate implants? An evaluation of 103Pd versus 125I based on radiobiological effectiveness and dosimetry. Semin Urol Oncol. 2000;18:152‐159.
Yue N, Heron DE, Komanduri K, Huq MS. Prescription dose in permanent 131Cs seed prostate implants. Med Phys. 2005;32:2496‐2502.
Armpilia CI, Dale RG, Coles IP, Jones B, Antipas V. The determination of radiobiologically optimized half‐lives for radionuclides used in permanent brachytherapy implants. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55:378‐385.
Chen Z, Nath R. Biologically effective dose (BED) for interstitial seed implants containing a mixture of radionuclides with different half‐lives. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55:825‐834.
Yue N, Chen Z, Nath R. Edema‐induced increase in tumour cell survival for 125I and 103Pd prostate permanent seed implants—a bio‐mathematical model. Phys Med Biol. 2002;47:1185‐1204.
Van Gellekom MP, Moerland MA, Kal HB, Battermann JJ. Biologically effective dose for permanent prostate brachytherapy taking into account postimplant edema. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;53:422‐433.
Chen ZJ, Deng J, Roberts K, Nath R. On the need to compensate for edema‐induced dose reductions in preplanned 131Cs prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;70:303‐310.
Chen ZJ, Roberts K, Decker R, Pathare P, Rockwell S, Nath R. The impact of prostate edema on cell survival and tumor control after permanent interstitial brachytherapy for early stage prostate cancers. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56:4895‐4912.
Li XA, Wang JZ, Stewart RD, DiBiase SJ. Dose escalation in permanent brachytherapy for prostate cancer: dosimetric and biological considerations. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48:2753‐2765.
Jani AB, Hand CM, Lujan AE, et al. Biological effective dose for comparison and combination of external beam and low‐dose rate interstitial brachytherapy prostate cancer treatment plans. Med Dosim. 2004;29:42‐48.
King CR. LDR vs. HDR brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer: the view from radiobiological models. Brachytherapy. 2002;1:219‐226.
Armpilia C, Dale RG, Sandilos P, Vlachos L. Radiobiological modelling of dose‐gradient effects in low dose rate, high dose rate and pulsed brachytherapy. Phys Med Biol. 2006;51:4399‐4411.
Stock RG, Stone NN, Cesaretti JA, Rosenstein BS. Biologically effective dose values for prostate brachytherapy: effects on PSA failure and posttreatment biopsy results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64:527‐533.
Baltas D, Lymperopoulou G, Loffler E, Mavroidis P. A radiobiological investigation on dose and dose rate for permanent implant brachytherapy of breast using 125I or 103Pd sources. Med Phys. 2010;37:2572‐2586.
Afsharpour H, Reniers B, Landry G, et al. Consequences of dose heterogeneity on the biological efficiency of 103Pd permanent breast seed implants. Phys Med Biol. 2012;57:809‐823.
Bianchi C, Botta F, Conte L, Vanoli P, Cerizza L. Biological effective dose evaluation in gynaecological brachytherapy: lDR and HDR treatments, dependence on radiobiological parameters, and treatment optimisation. Radiol Med. 2008;113:1068‐1078.
Miksys N, Haidari M, Vigneault E, Martin AG, Beaulieu L, Thomson RM. Coupling I‐125 permanent implant prostate brachytherapy Monte Carlo dose calculations with radiobiological models. Med Phys. 2017;44:4329‐4340.
Bentzen SM, Dorr W, Gahbauer R, et al. Bioeffect modeling and equieffective dose concepts in radiation oncology—terminology, quantities and units. Radiother Oncol. 2012;105:266‐268.
Gong J, Dos Santos MM, Finlay C, Hillen T. Are more complicated tumour control probability models better? Math Med Biol. 2013;30:1‐19.
Dubray BM, Thames HD. The clinical significance of ratios of radiobiological parameters. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;35:1099‐1111.
Tucker SL, Thames HD, Taylor JM. How well is the probability of tumor cure after fractionated irradiation described by Poisson statistics? Radiat Res. 1990;124:273‐282.
Keall PJ, Webb S. Optimum parameters in a model for tumour control probability, including interpatient heterogeneity: evaluation of the log‐normal distribution. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52:291‐302.
Haworth A, Ebert M, Waterhouse D, Joseph D, Duchesne G. Assessment of i‐125 prostate implants by tumor bioeffect. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;59:1405‐1413.
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ, Huang Y, Sachs RK. Optimizing the time course of brachytherapy and other accelerated radiotherapeutic protocols. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1994;29:893‐901.
D'Souza WD, Thames HD, Kuban DA. Dose‐volume conundrum for response of prostate cancer to brachytherapy: summary dosimetric measures and their relationship to tumor control probability. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;58:1540‐1548.
Knaup C, Mavroidis P, Esquivel C, et al. Investigating the dosimetric and tumor control consequences of prostate seed loss and migration. Med Phys. 2012;39:3291‐3298.
Tucker SL, Taylor JM. Improved models of tumour cure. Int J Radiat Biol. 1996;70:539‐553.
Stavreva NA, Stavrev PV, Warkentin B, Fallone BG. Investigating the effect of cell repopulation on the tumor response to fractionated external radiotherapy. Med Phys. 2003;30:735‐742.
Chen Z, Nath R. On the use of biologically effective dose (BED) and iso‐effective dose (IED) in radiobiological evaluations of permanent brachytherapy with proliferating tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;84:S755.
Goitein M, Schultheiss TE. Strategies for treating possible tumor extension: some theoretical considerations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1985;11:1519‐1528.
Lyman JT. Complication probability as assessed from dose‐volume histograms. Radiat Res. 1985;8:S13‐S19.
El Naqa I. A Guide to Outcome Modeling In Radiotherapy and Oncology: Listening To the Data. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2018.
Tanderup K, Nesvacil N, Kirchheiner K, et al. Evidence‐based dose planning aims and dose prescription in image‐guided brachytherapy combined with radiochemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2020;30:311‐327.
Jameson MG, Ohanessian L, Batumalai V, Patel V, Holloway LC. Comparison of Oncentra® Brachy IPSA and graphical optimisation techniques: a case study of HDR brachytherapy head and neck and prostate plans. J Med Radiat Sci. 2015;62:168‐174.
Nesvacil N, Tanderup K, Lindegaard JC, Potter R, Kirisits C. Can reduction of uncertainties in cervix cancer brachytherapy potentially improve clinical outcome? Radiother Oncol. 2016;120:390‐396.
Schmid MP, Franckena M, Kirchheiner K, et al. Distant metastasis in patients with cervical cancer after primary radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy and image guided adaptive brachytherapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;133:256‐262.
Tanderup K, Fokdal LU, Sturdza A, et al. Effect of tumor dose, volume and overall treatment time on local control after radiochemotherapy including MRI guided brachytherapy of locally advanced cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2016;120:441‐446.
Travis EL. Organizational response of normal tissues to irradiation. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2001;11:184‐196.
Wolbarst AB, Chin LM, Svensson GK. Optimization of radiation therapy: integral‐response of a model biological system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1982;8:1761‐1769.
Niemierko A, Goitein M. Modeling of normal tissue response to radiation: the critical volume model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993;25:135‐145.
Niemierko A, Goitein M. Calculation of normal tissue complication probability and dose‐volume histogram reduction schemes for tissues with a critical element architecture. Radiother Oncol. 1991;20:166‐176.
Yorke ED, Kutcher GJ, Jackson A, Ling CC. Probability of radiation‐induced complications in normal tissues with parallel architecture under conditions of uniform whole or partial organ irradiation. Radiother Oncol. 1993;26:226‐237.
Jackson A, Kutcher GJ, Yorke ED. Probability of radiation‐induced complications for normal tissues with parallel architecture subject to non‐uniform irradiation. Med Phys. 1993;20:613‐625.
Hendry JH, Thames HD. The tissue rescuing unit. Br J Radiol. 1986;59:628‐630.
Thames HD, Zhang M, Tucker SL, Liu HH, Dong L, Mohan R. Cluster models of dose‐volume effects. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;59:1491‐1504.
Tucker SL, Zhang M, Dong L, Mohan R, Kuban D, Thames HD. Cluster model analysis of late rectal bleeding after IMRT of prostate cancer: a case‐control study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64:1255‐1264.
Tucker SL, Liu HH, Liao Z, et al. Analysis of radiation pneumonitis risk using a generalized Lyman model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72:568‐574.
Hamilton CS, Chan LY, McElwain DL, Denham JW. A practical evaluation of five dose‐volume histogram reduction algorithms. Radiother Oncol. 1992;24:251‐260.
Cozzi L, Buffa FM, Fogliata A. Comparative analysis of dose volume histogram reduction algorithms for normal tissue complication probability calculations. Acta Oncol. 2000;39:165‐171.
Kutcher GJ, Burman C, Brewster L, Goitein M, Mohan R. Histogram reduction method for calculating complication probabilities for three‐dimensional treatment planning evaluations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21:137‐146.
Deasy JO. Comments on the use of the Lyman‐Kutcher‐Burman model to describe tissue response to nonuniform irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;47:1458‐1460.
Bovi J, Qi XS, White J, Li XA. Comparison of three accelerated partial breast irradiation techniques: treatment effectiveness based upon biological models. Radiother Oncol. 2007;84:226‐232.
Lee SP, Leu MY, Smathers JB, McBride WH, Parker RG, Withers HR. Biologically effective dose distribution based on the linear quadratic model and its clinical relevance. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995;33:375‐389.
Wheldon TE, Deehan C, Wheldon EG, Barrett A. The linear‐quadratic transformation of dose‐volume histograms in fractionated radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 1998;46:285‐295.
Marks LB, Sherouse GW, Munley MT, Bentel GC, Spencer DP. Incorporation of functional status into dose‐volume analysis. Med Phys. 1999;26:196‐199.
Lu Y, Spelbring DR, Chen GT. Functional dose‐volume histograms for functionally heterogeneous normal organs. Phys Med Biol. 1997;42:345‐356.
Niemierko A, Goitein M. Implementation of a model for estimating tumor control probability for an inhomogeneously irradiated tumor. Radiother Oncol. 1993;29:140‐147.
Webb S, Nahum AE. A model for calculating tumour control probability in radiotherapy including the effects of inhomogeneous distributions of dose and clonogenic cell density. Phys Med Biol. 1993;38:653‐666.
Mohan R, Mageras GS, Baldwin B, et al. Clinically relevant optimization of 3‐D conformal treatments. Med Phys. 1992;19:933‐944.
Kallman P, Agren A, Brahme A. Tumour and normal tissue responses to fractionated non‐uniform dose delivery. Int J Radiat Biol. 1992;62:249‐262.
Stavreva NA, Stavrev PV. Some limitations of the application of the NTCP model describing the response of organs with ‘relatively serial’ structure. Int J Radiat Biol. 2002;78:948‐950. author reply 951–942.
Niemierko A. Reporting and analyzing dose distributions: a concept of equivalent uniform dose. Med Phys. 1997;24:103‐110.
Wang JZ, Li XA. Evaluation of external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer using equivalent uniform dose. Med Phys. 2003;30:34‐40.
Jones LC, Hoban PW. Treatment plan comparison using equivalent uniform biologically effective dose (EUBED). Phys Med Biol. 2000;45:159‐170.
Niemierko A. A generalized concept of equivalent uniform dose (EUD) (Abstract). Med Phys. 1999;26:1100.
Haidari AM, Miksys N, Soubiran P, et al. Dosimetric and radiobiological investigation of permanent implant prostate brachytherapy based on Monte Carlo calculations. Brachytherapy. 2019;18:875‐882.
van Leeuwen CM, Oei AL, Crezee J, et al. The α and β of tumours: a review of parameters of the linear‐quadratic model, derived from clinical radiotherapy studies. Radiat Oncol. 2018;13:96.
Dasu A. Is the α/β value for prostate tumours low enough to be safely used in clinical trials? Clin Oncol. 2007;19:289‐301.
Carlson DJ, Stewart RD, Li XA, Jennings K, Wang JZ, Guerrero M. Comparison of in vitro and in vivo α/β ratios for prostate cancer. Phys Med Biol. 2004;49:4477‐4491.
Fowler JF. Sensitivity analysis of parameters in linear‐quadratic radiobiologic modeling. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;73:1532‐1537.
Williams MV, Denekamp J, Fowler JF. A review of α/β ratios for experimental tumors: implications for clinical studies of altered fractionation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1985;11:87‐96.
Chow B, Warkentin B, Menon G. Radiobiological dose calculation parameters for cervix cancer brachytherapy: a systematic review. Brachytherapy. 2019;18:546‐558.
Wang JZ, Li XA. Impact of tumor repopulation on radiotherapy planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;61:220‐227.
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Fractionation and protraction for radiotherapy of prostate carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;43:1095‐1101.
Fowler J, Chappell R, Ritter M. Is α/β for prostate tumors really low? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;50:1021‐1031.
Wang JZ, Guerrero M, Li XA. How low is the α/β ratio for prostate cancer? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55:194‐203.
Miralbell R, Roberts SA, Zubizarreta E, Hendry JH. Dose‐fractionation sensitivity of prostate cancer deduced from radiotherapy outcomes of 5,969 patients in seven international institutional datasets: α/β = 1.4 (0.9–2.2) Gy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82:e17‐e24.
Pedicini P, Strigari L, Benassi M. Estimation of a self‐consistent set of radiobiological parameters from hypofractionated versus standard radiation therapy of prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;85:e231‐e237.
Viswanathan AN, Beriwal S, De Los Santos JF, et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part II: high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy. 2012;11:47‐52.
Lang S, Nulens A, Briot E, et al. Intercomparison of treatment concepts for MR image assisted brachytherapy of cervical carcinoma based on GYN GEC‐ESTRO recommendations. Radiother Oncol. 2006;78:185‐193.
Roberts SA, Hendry JH, Swindell R, Wilkinson JM, Hunter RD. Compensation for changes in dose‐rate in radical low‐dose‐rate brachytherapy: a radiobiological analysis of a randomised clinical trial. Radiother Oncol. 2004;70:63‐74.
Kelland LR, Steel GG. Differences in radiation response among human cervix carcinoma cell lines. Radiother Oncol. 1988;13:225‐232.
Gasinska A, Fowler JF, Lind BK, Urbanski K. Influence of overall treatment time and radiobiological parameters on biologically effective doses in cervical cancer patients treated with radiation therapy alone. Acta Oncol. 2004;43:657‐666.
Huang Z, Mayr NA, Gao M, et al. Onset time of tumor repopulation for cervical cancer: first evidence from clinical data. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;84:478‐484.
Guerrero M, Li XA. Analysis of a large number of clinical studies for breast cancer radiotherapy: estimation of radiobiological parameters for treatment planning. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48:3307‐3326.
Qi XS, White J, Li XA. Is α/β for breast cancer really low? Radiother Oncol. 2011;100:282‐288.
Guirado D, de la Vega JM, Guerrero R, Lallena AM. Radiobiological parameters for breast cancer: a Monte Carlo analysis of START trial published results. Br J Radiol. 2018;91:20170979.
Roberts SA, Hendry JH. The delay before onset of accelerated tumour cell repopulation during radiotherapy: a direct maximum‐likelihood analysis of a collection of worldwide tumour‐control data. Radiother Oncol. 1993;29:69‐74.
Wu PM, Chua DT, Sham JS, et al. Tumor control probability of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a comparison of different mathematical models. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;37:913‐920.
Brenner DJ. Dose, volume, and tumor‐control predictions in radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993;26:171‐179.
Qi XS, Schultz CJ, Li XA. An estimation of radiobiologic parameters from clinical outcomes for radiation treatment planning of brain tumor. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64:1570‐1580.
Suwinski R, Wzietek I, Tarnawski R, et al. Moderately low α/β ratio for rectal cancer may best explain the outcome of three fractionation schedules of preoperative radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;69:793‐799.
Tai A, Erickson B, Khater KA, Li XA. Estimate of radiobiologic parameters from clinical data for biologically based treatment planning for liver irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;70:900‐907.
Webb S. Optimum parameters in a model for tumour control probability including interpatient heterogeneity. Phys Med Biol. 1994;39:1895‐1914.
Okunieff P, Morgan D, Niemierko A, Suit HD. Radiation dose‐response of human tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995;32:1227‐1237.
Emami B, Lyman J, Brown A, et al. Tolerance of normal tissue to therapeutic irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21:109‐122.
Burman C, Kutcher GJ, Emami B, Goitein M. Fitting of normal tissue tolerance data to an analytic function. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21:123‐135.
Marks LB, Ten Haken RK, Martel MK. Guest editor's introduction to QUANTEC: a users guide. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;76:S1‐S2.
Zaider M, Zelefsky MJ, Cohen GN, et al. Methodology for biologically‐based treatment planning for combined low‐dose‐rate (permanent implant) and high‐dose‐rate (fractionated) treatment of prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;61:702‐713.
Hall EJ. Weiss lecture. The dose‐rate factor in radiation biology. Int J Radiat Biol. 1991;59:595‐610.
Mazeron JJ, Simon JM, Crook J, et al. Influence of dose rate on local control of breast carcinoma treated by external beam irradiation plus iridium 192 implant. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21:1173‐1177.
Hall EJ, Bedford JS. Dose rate: its effect on the survival of HeLa cells irradiated with gamma rays. Radiat Res. 1964;22:305‐315.
Lambin P, Gerbaulet A, Kramar A, et al. Phase III trial comparing two low dose rates in brachytherapy of cervix carcinoma: report at two years. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993;25:405‐412.
Haie‐Meder C, Kramar A, Lambin P, et al. Analysis of complications in a prospective randomized trial comparing two brachytherapy low dose rates in cervical carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1994;29:953‐960.
Leborgne F, Fowler JF, Leborgne JH, Zubizarreta E, Chappell R. Fractionation in medium dose rate brachytherapy of cancer of the cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;35:907‐914.
Rodrigus P, De Winter K, Venselaar JL, Leers WH. Evaluation of late morbidity in patients with carcinoma of the uterine cervix following a dose rate change. Radiother Oncol. 1997;42:137‐141.
Coutard H. Roentgentherapy of epitheliomas of the tonsillar region, hypopharynx, and larynx, from 1920 to 1926. Am J Roentgenol. 1932;28:343‐348.
Brenner DJ. Hypofractionation for prostate cancer radiotherapy—what are the issues? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;57:912‐914.
Brenner DJ, Huang Y, Hall EJ. Fractionated high dose‐rate versus low dose‐rate regimens for intracavitary brachytherapy of the cervix: equivalent regimens for combined brachytherapy and external irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21:1415‐1423.
Sloboda RS, Batchelar DL, Chen Z. Low‐dose‐rate brachytherapy for prostate. In: Rivard MJ, Beaulieu L, Thomadsen BR, eds. Clinical Brachytherapy Physics. Medical Physics Publishing, Inc.; 2017.
Yu Y, Anderson LL, Li Z, et al. Permanent prostate seed implant brachytherapy: report of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group No. 64. Med Phys. 1999;26:2054‐2076.
Fisher B, Porter AT, Barnett RB, Mason DLZ, Papiez E, Battista JJ. First clinical application of a new brachytherapy source‐Yb‐169. Endocurietherapy Hypertherm Oncol. 1993;9:195‐199.
Peschel RE, Chen Z, Roberts K, Nath R. Long‐term complications with prostate implants: iodine‐125 vs. palladium‐103. Radiat Oncol Investig. 1999;7:278‐288.
Dale RG, Jones B. Enhanced normal tissue doses caused by tumour shrinkage during brachytherapy. Br J Radiol. 1999;72:499‐501.
Moerland MA, Wijrdeman HK, Beersma R, Bakker CJ, Battermann JJ. Evaluation of permanent I‐125 prostate implants using radiography and magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;37:927‐933.
Narayana V, Roberson PL, Pu AT, Sandler H, Winfield RH, McLaughlin PW. Impact of differences in ultrasound and computed tomography volumes on treatment planning of permanent prostate implants. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;37:1181‐1185.
Nath R, Bongiorni P, Chen Z, Gragnano J, Rockwell S. Dose rate dependence of the relative biological effectiveness of 103Pd for continuous low dose rate irradiation of BA1112 rhabdomyosarcoma cells in vitro relative to acute exposures. Int J Radiat Biol. 2005;81:689‐699.
Villeneuve M, Leclerc G, Lessard E, Pouliot J, Beaulieu L. Relationship between isotope half‐life and prostatic edema for optimal prostate dose coverage in permanent seed implants. Med Phys. 2008;35:1970‐1977.
Beaulieu L, Carlsson Tedgren A, Carrier JF, et al. Report of the Task Group 186 on model‐based dose calculation methods in brachytherapy beyond the TG‐43 formalism: current status and recommendations for clinical implementation. Med Phys. 2012;39:6208‐6236.
Carrier JF, D'Amours M, Verhaegen F, et al. Postimplant dosimetry using a Monte Carlo dose calculation engine: a new clinical standard. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68:1190‐1198.
Collins Fekete CA, Plamondon M, Martin AG, Vigneault E, Verhaegen F, Beaulieu L. Calcifications in low‐dose rate prostate seed brachytherapy treatment: post‐planning dosimetry and predictive factors. Radiother Oncol. 2015;114:339‐344.
Miksys N, Vigneault E, Martin AG, Beaulieu L, Thomson RM. Large‐scale retrospective Monte Carlo dosimetric study for permanent implant prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;97:606‐615.
Vigneault E, Mbodji K, Carignan D, et al. The association of intraprostatic calcifications and dosimetry parameters with biochemical control after permanent prostate implant. Brachytherapy. 2019;18:787‐792.
Afsharpour H, Walsh S, Collins Fekete CA, Vigneault E, Verhaegen F, Beaulieu L. On the sensitivity of α/β prediction to dose calculation methodology in prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;88:345‐350.
Antipas V, Dale RG, Coles IP. A theoretical investigation into the role of tumour radiosensitivity, clonogen repopulation, tumour shrinkage and radionuclide RBE in permanent brachytherapy implants of 125I and 103Pd. Phys Med Biol. 2001;46:2557‐2569.
Roy JN, Anderson LL, Wallner KE, Fuks Z, Ling CC. Tumor control probability for permanent implants in prostate. Radiother Oncol. 1993;28:72‐75.
Yaes RJ. Late normal tissue injury from permanent interstitial implants. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;49:1163‐1169.
Haworth A, Mears C, Betts JM, et al. A radiobiology‐based inverse treatment planning method for optimisation of permanent I‐125 prostate implants in focal brachytherapy. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61:430‐444.
Knaup C, Mavroidis P, Esquivel C, et al. Radiobiologically based treatment plan evaluation for prostate seed implants. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2011;3:74‐83.
Butler WM, Stewart RR, Merrick GS. A detailed radiobiological and dosimetric analysis of biochemical outcomes in a case‐control study of permanent prostate brachytherapy patients. Med Phys. 2009;36:776‐787.
Yamada Y, Rogers L, Demanes DJ, et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for high‐dose‐rate prostate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy. 2012;11:20‐32.
Batchelar DL, Chen Z, Libby B, Mourtada F, Richardson SL, Siebert F. High‐dose‐rate brachytherapy for prostate. In: Rivard MJ, Beaulieu L, Thomadsen B, eds. Clinical Brachytherapy Physics. Medical Physics Publishing, Inc.; 2017.
Martell K, Mendez LC, Chung HT, et al. Results of 15 Gy HDR‐BT boost plus EBRT in intermediate‐risk prostate cancer: analysis of over 500 patients. Radiother Oncol. 2019;141:149‐155.
Yoshioka Y, Suzuki O, Isohashi F, et al. High‐dose‐rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for intermediate‐ and high‐risk prostate cancer: clinical results for a median 8‐year follow‐up. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;94:675‐682.
Demanes DJ, Martinez AA, Ghilezan M, et al. High‐dose‐rate monotherapy: safe and effective brachytherapy for patients with localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81:1286‐1292.
Yoshioka Y, Yoshida K, Yamazaki H, Nonomura N, Ogawa K. The emerging role of high‐dose‐rate (HDR) brachytherapy as monotherapy for prostate cancer. J Radiat Res. 2013;54:781‐788.
Siddiqui ZA, Gustafson GS, Ye H, et al. Five‐year outcomes of a single‐institution prospective trial of 19‐Gy single‐fraction high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy for low‐ and intermediate‐risk prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019;104:1038‐1044.
Xu MJ, Chen KS, Chang AJ, et al. Single‐fraction brachytherapy as monotherapy for early‐stage prostate cancer: the UCSF experience. Brachytherapy. 2019;18:470‐476.
Fowler JF. Time‐variable dose rate in HDR stepping source brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol. 1993;29:355‐356.
Accessed April 28, 2024. https://www.bebig.com/home/products/hdr_brachytherapy/cobalt_60/
Fowler JF. The radiobiology of prostate cancer including new aspects of fractionated radiotherapy. Acta Oncol. 2005;44:265‐276.
Wang JZ, Li XA, D'Souza WD, Stewart RD. Impact of prolonged fraction delivery times on tumor control: a note of caution for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;57:543‐552.
Fowler JF, Welsh JS, Howard SP. Loss of biological effect in prolonged fraction delivery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;59:242‐249.
Tien CJ, Carlson DJ, Nath R, Chen ZJ. High‐dose‐rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for prostate cancer: the impact of cellular repair and source decay. Brachytherapy. 2019;18:701‐710.
Barkati M, Williams SG, Foroudi F, et al. High‐dose‐rate brachytherapy as a monotherapy for favorable‐risk prostate cancer: a phase 2 trial. Int J Radiat Biol Phys. 2012;82:1889‐1896.
Cendales R, Alwers E, Cifuentes J, et al. High‐dose‐rate brachytherapy delivered in two fractions as monotherapy for low‐risk prostate cancer. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2015;7:10‐16.
Corner C, Rojas AM, Bryant L, Ostler P, Hoskin P. A phase II study of high‐dose‐rate afterloading brachytherapy as monotherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Biol Phys. 2008;72:441‐446.
Ghadjar P, Keller T, Rentsch CA, et al. Toxicity and early treatment outcomes in low‐ and intermediate‐risk prostate cancer managed by high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy as a monotherapy. Brachytherapy. 2009;8:45‐51.
Hauswald H, Kamrava MR, Fallon JM, et al. High‐dose‐rate monotherapy for localized prostate cancer: 10‐year results. Int J Radiat Biol Phys. 2016;94:667‐674.
Hoskin P, Rojas A, Bownes P, Lowe G, Ostler P, Bryant L. Randomised trial of external beam radiotherapy alone or combined with high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy boost for localised prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2012;103:217‐222.
Hoskin P, Rojas A, Lowe G, et al. High‐dose‐rate brachytherapy alone for localized prostate cancer in patients at moderate or high risk of biochemical recurrence. Int J Radiat Biol Phys. 2012;82:1376‐1384.
Hoskin P, Rojas A, Ostler P, et al. High‐dose‐rate brachytherapy alone given as two or one fraction to patients for locally advanced prostate cancer: acute toxicity. Radiother Oncol. 2014;110:268‐271.
Jawad MS, Dilworth JT, Gustafson GS, et al. Outcomes associated with 3 treatment schedules of high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy monotherapy for favorable‐risk prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Biol Phys. 2016;94:657‐666.
Komiya A, Fujiuchi Y, Ito T, et al. Early quality of life outcomes in patients with prostate cancer managed by high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy as monotherapy. Int J Urol. 2013;20:185‐192.
Mark RJ, White D, Akins R, Mutyala S, Nair M. Interstitial high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy as monotherapy for early‐stage prostate cancer: median 8 year results in 321 patients. Int J Radiat Biol Phys. 2011;81:S14.
Martinez AA, Demanes J, Vargas C, Schour L, Ghilezan M, Gustafson GS. High‐dose‐rate prostate brachytherapy: an excellent accelerated‐hypofractionated treatment for favorable prostate cancer. Am J Clin Oncol. 2010;33:481‐488.
Martinez AA, Pataki I, Edmundson G, Sebastian E, Brabbins D, Gustafson G. Phase 2 prospective study of the use of conformal high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for the treatment of favorable stage prostate cancer: a feasibility report. Int J Radiat Biol Phys. 2001;49:61‐69.
Potharaju M, Subramanaiam R, Venkataraman M, et al. A report on the clinical outcome after high‐dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy as monotherapy in early prostate cancer. Cureus. 2015;7:e303.
Prada PJ, Jiminez I, Gonzalez‐Suarez H, Fernandez J, Cuervo‐Arango C, Mendez L. High‐dose‐rate interstitial brachytherapy as monotherapy in one fraction and transperineal hyaluronic acid injection into the perirectal fat for the treatment of favorable stage prostate cancer: treatment description and preliminary results. Brachytherapy. 2012;11:105‐110.
Rogers CL, Adler SC, Rogers RL, et al. High dose brachytherapy as monotherapy for intermediate risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2012;187:109‐116.
Tselis N, Tunn UW, Chatzikonstantinou G, et al. High dose rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for localised prostate cancer: a hypofractionated two‐implant approach in 351 consecutive patients. Radiat Oncol. 2013;85:672‐678.
Yoshioka Y, Nose T, Yoshida K, et al. High‐dose‐rate interstitial brachytherapy as a monotherapy for localized prostate cancer: treatment description and preliminary results of a phase I/II clinical trial. Int J Radiat Biol Phys. 2000;48:675‐681.
Zamboglou N, Tselis N, Baltas D, et al. High‐dose‐rate interstitial brachytherapy as monotherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer: treatment evolution and mature results. Int J Radiat Biol Phys. 2013;85:672‐678.
Galelli M, Feroldi P. Response to Professor Fowler. Radiat Oncol. 1993;29:356.
Fowler JF, Van Limbergen EF. Biological effect of pulsed dose rate brachytherapy with stepping sources if short half‐times of repair are present in tissues. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;37:877‐883.
Manning MA, Zwicker RD, Arthur DW, Arnfield M. Biologic treatment planning for high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;49:839‐845.
Mavroidis P, Milickovic N, Cruz WF, et al. Comparison of different fractionation schedules toward a single fraction in high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for low‐risk prostate cancer using 3‐dimensional radiobiological models. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;88:216‐223.
Mavroidis P, Katsilieri Z, Kefala V, et al. Radiobiological evaluation of the influence of dwell time modulation restriction in HIPO optimized HDR prostate brachytherapy implants. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2010;2:117‐128.
Williams SG, Taylor JM, Liu N, et al. Use of individual fraction size data from 3756 patients to directly determine the α/β ratio of prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68:24‐33.
Hoskin P, Rojas A, Ostler P, Hughes R, Alonzi R, Lowe G. Single‐dose high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy compared to two and three fractions for locally advanced prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2017;124:56‐60.
Tharmalingam H, Tsang Y, Ostler P, et al. Single dose high‐dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy (BT) as monotherapy for localised prostate cancer: early results of a UK national cohort study. Radiother Oncol. 2020;143:95‐100.
Mendez LC, Ravi A, Chung H, et al. Pattern of relapse and dose received by the recurrent intraprostatic nodule in low‐ to intermediate‐risk prostate cancer treated with single fraction 19 Gy high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy. 2018;17:291‐297.
Damato AL, Beaulieu L, Mourtada F. Brachytherapy for gynecological malignancies. In: Rivard MJ, Beaulieu L, Thomadsen B, eds. Clinical Brachytherapy Physics. Medical Physics Publishing; 2017.
Small W Jr, Beriwal S, Demanes DJ, et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for adjuvant vaginal cuff brachytherapy after hysterectomy. Brachytherapy. 2012;11:58‐67.
Schwarz JK, Beriwal S, Esthappan J, et al. Consensus statement for brachytherapy for the treatment of medically inoperable endometrial cancer. Brachytherapy. 2015;14:587‐599.
Viswanathan AN, Thomadsen B, American Brachytherapy Society Cervical Cancer Recommendations Committee. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part I: general principles. Brachytherapy. 2012;11:33‐46.
Lee LJ, Das IJ, Higgins SA, et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part III: low‐dose‐rate and pulsed‐dose‐rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy. 2012;11:53‐57.
Haie‐Meder C, Potter R, Van Limbergen E, et al. Recommendations from Gynaecological (GYN) GEC‐ESTRO Working Group (I): concepts and terms in 3D image based 3D treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy with emphasis on MRI assessment of GTV and CTV. Radiother Oncol. 2005;74:235‐245.
Potter R, Haie‐Meder C, Van Limbergen E, et al. Recommendations from Gynaecological (GYN) GEC ESTRO Working Group (II): concepts and terms in 3D image‐based treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy‐3D dose volume parameters and aspects of 3D image‐based anatomy, radiation physics, radiobiology. Radiother Oncol. 2006;78:67‐77.
Beriwal S, Demanes DJ, Erickson B, et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for interstitial brachytherapy for vaginal cancer. Brachytherapy. 2012;11:68‐75.
Dimopoulos JC, Kirisits C, Petric P, et al. The Vienna applicator for combined intracavitary and interstitial brachytherapy of cervical cancer: clinical feasibility and preliminary results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;66:83‐90.
Kirisits C, Lang S, Dimopoulos J, Berger D, Georg D, Potter R. The Vienna applicator for combined intracavitary and interstitial brachytherapy of cervical cancer: design, application, treatment planning, and dosimetric results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65:624‐630.
Wooten CE, Randall M, Edwards J, Aryal P, Luo W, Feddock J. Implementation and early clinical results utilizing Cs‐131 permanent interstitial implants for gynecologic malignancies. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;133:268‐273.
Sharma BA, Singh TT, Singh LJ, Singh YI, Devi YS. Biological effective doses in the intracavitary high dose rate brachytherapy of cervical cancer. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2011;3:188‐192.
Clark BG, Souhami L, Roman TN, Chappell R, Evans MD, Fowler JF. The prediction of late rectal complications in patients treated with high dose‐rate brachytherapy for carcinoma of the cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;38:989‐993.
Sminia P, Schneider CJ, Fowler JF. The optimal fraction size in high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy: dependency on tissue repair kinetics and low‐dose rate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;52:844‐849.
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ, Huang Y, Sachs RK. Potential reduced late effects for pulsed brachytherapy compared with conventional LDR. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995;31:201‐202.
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Conditions for the equivalence of continuous to pulsed low dose rate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;20:181‐190.
Baker S, Pooler A, Hendry J, Davidson S. The implementation of the Gynaecological Groupe Europeen de Curietherapie—European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology radiobiology considerations in the conversion of low dose rate to pulsed dose rate treatment schedules for gynaecological brachytherapy. Clin Oncol. 2013;25:265‐271.
Chen CZ, Huang Y, Hall EJ, Brenner DJ. Pulsed brachytherapy as a substitute for continuous low dose rate: an in vitro study with human carcinoma cells. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;37:137‐143.
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ, Randers‐Pehrson G, et al. Quantitative comparisons of continuous and pulsed low dose rate regimens in a model late‐effect system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;34:905‐910.
Orton CG. High‐dose‐rate brachytherapy may be radiobiologically superior to low‐dose rate due to slow repair of late‐responding normal tissue cells. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;49:183‐189.
Orton CG, Seyedsadr M, Somnay A. Comparison of high and low dose rate remote afterloading for cervix cancer and the importance of fractionation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21:1425‐1434.
Mazeron R, Fokdal LU, Kirchheiner K, et al. Dose‐volume effect relationships for late rectal morbidity in patients treated with chemoradiation and MRI‐guided adaptive brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer: results from the prospective multicenter EMBRACE study. Radiother Oncol. 2016;120:412‐419.
Kirchheiner K, Nout RA, Lindegaard JC, et al. Dose‐effect relationship and risk factors for vaginal stenosis after definitive radio(chemo)therapy with image‐guided brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer in the EMBRACE study. Radiother Oncol. 2016;118:160‐166.
Dimopoulos JC, Potter R, Lang S, et al. Dose‐effect relationship for local control of cervical cancer by magnetic resonance image‐guided brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2009;93:311‐315.
Georg P, Potter R, Georg D, et al. Dose effect relationship for late side effects of the rectum and urinary bladder in magnetic resonance image‐guided adaptive cervix cancer brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82:653‐657.
Spampinato S, Fokdal LU, Potter R, et al. Risk factors and dose‐effects for bladder fistula, bleeding and cystitis after radiotherapy with imaged‐guided adaptive brachytherapy for cervical cancer: an EMBRACE analysis. Radiother Oncol. 2021;158:312‐320.
The Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study Group. Design and methods of a clinical trial for a rare condition: the Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study: cOMS Report No. 3. Control Clin Trials. 1993;14:362‐391.
Jampol LM, Moy CS, Murray TG, et al. The COMS randomized trial of iodine 125 brachytherapy for choroidal melanoma: IV. Local treatment failure and enucleation in the first 5 years after brachytherapy. COMS report no. 19. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:2197‐2206.
Jensen AW, Petersen IA, Kline RW, Stafford SL, Schomberg PJ, Robertson DM. Radiation complications and tumor control after 125I plaque brachytherapy for ocular melanoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;63:101‐108.
Finger PT, Chin KJ, Duvall G. The Palladium‐103 for Choroidal Melanoma Study Group. Palladium‐103 ophthalmic plaque radiation therapy for choroidal melanoma: 400 treated patients. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:790‐796.e1.
Leonard KL, Gagne NL, Mignano JE, Duker JS, Bannon EA, Rivard MJ. A 17‐year retrospective study of institutional results for eye plaque brachytherapy of uveal melanoma using 125I, 103Pd, and 131Cs and historical perspective. Brachytherapy. 2011;10:331‐339.
Rivard MJ, Chiu‐Tsao ST, Finger PT, et al. Comparison of dose calculation methods for brachytherapy of intraocular tumors. Med Phys. 2011;38:306‐316.
Thomson RM, Furutani KM, Kaulich TW, et al. AAPM recommendations on medical physics practices for ocular plaque brachytherapy: report of Task Group 221. Med Phys. 2019;47:e92‐e124.
Gagne NL, Rivard MJ. Quantifying the dosimetric influences of radiation coverage and brachytherapy implant placement uncertainty on eye plaque size selection. Brachytherapy. 2013;12:508‐520.
Tien CJ, Astrahan MA, Kim JM, et al. Incorporating patient‐specific CT‐based ophthalmic anatomy in modeling iodine‐125 eye plaque brachytherapy dose distributions. Brachytherapy. 2017;16:1057‐1064.
Nag S, Quivey JM, Earle JD, et al. The American Brachytherapy Society recommendations for brachytherapy of uveal melanomas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;56:544‐555.
Quivey JM, Augsburger J, Snelling L, Brady LW. 125I plaque therapy for uveal melanoma. Analysis of the impact of time and dose factors on local control. Cancer. 1996;77:2356‐2362.
Gagne NL, Rivard MJ. COMS eye plaque brachytherapy dosimetric sensitivity to source photon energy and seed design. Appl Radiat Isot. 2013;79:62‐66.
Augsburger JJ, Gonder JR, Amsel J, Shields JA, Donoso LA. Growth rates and doubling times of posterior uveal melanomas. Ophthalmology. 1984;91:1709‐1715.
Gagne NL, Cutright DR, Rivard MJ. Keeping an eye on the ring: COMS plaque loading optimization for improved dose conformity and homogeneity. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2012;4:165‐175.
Gagne NL, Leonard KL, Rivard MJ. Radiobiology for eye plaque brachytherapy and evaluation of implant duration and radionuclide choice using an objective function. Med Phys. 2012;39:3332‐3342.
Gagne NL, Leonard KL, Huber KE, et al. BEDVH‐A method for evaluating biologically effective dose volume histograms: application to eye plaque brachytherapy implants. Med Phys. 2012;39:976‐983.
Miguel D, de Frutos‐Baraja JM, Lopez‐Lara F, et al. Radiobiological doses, tumor, and treatment features influence on outcomes after episcleral brachytherapy. A 20‐year retrospective analysis from a single‐institution: part II. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2018;10:347‐359.
van den Aardweg GJ, Kilic E, de Klein A, Luyten GP. Dose fractionation effects in primary and metastatic human uveal melanoma cell lines. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:4660‐4664.
Gorovets D, Gagne NL, Melhus CS. Dosimetric and radiobiologic comparison of 103Pd COMS plaque brachytherapy and Gamma Knife radiosurgery for choroidal melanoma. Brachytherapy. 2017;16:433‐443.
Nag S, Erickson B, Thomadsen B, Orton C, Demanes JD, Petereit D. The American Brachytherapy Society recommendations for high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy for carcinoma of the cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;48:201‐211.
Zaorsky NG, Den RB, Doyle LA, Dicker AP, Hurwitz MD. Combining theoretical potential and advanced technology in high‐dose rate brachytherapy boost therapy for prostate cancer. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2013;10:751‐763.
Kishan AU, Cook RR, Ciezki JP, et al. Radical prostatectomy, external beam radiotherapy, or external beam radiotherapy with brachytherapy boost and bisease progression and mortality in patients with Gleason score 9–10 prostate cancer. JAMA. 2018;319:896‐905.
Spratt DE, Soni PD, McLaughlin PW, et al. American Brachytherapy Society Task Group Report: combination of brachytherapy and external beam radiation for high‐risk prostate cancer. Brachytherapy. 2017;16:1‐12.
Brock KK, Mutic S, McNutt TR, Li H, Kessler ML. Use of image registration and fusion algorithms and techniques in radiotherapy: report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 132. Med Phys. 2017;44:e43‐e76.
Tornero‐Lopez AM, Guirado D. Radiobiological considerations in combining doses from external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy for cervical cancer. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2018;23:562‐573.
Lang S, Kirisits C, Dimopoulos J, Georg D, Potter R. Treatment planning for MRI assisted brachytherapy of gynecologic malignancies based on total dose constraints. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;69:619‐627.
De Leeuw AA, Van de Kamer JB, Moerland MA, Philippens ME, Jurgenliemk‐Schulz IM. The effect of alternative biological modelling parameters (α/β and half time of repair T1/2) on reported EQD2 values in the treatment of advanced cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2011;101:337‐342.
Swamidas J, Kirisits C, De Brabandere M, Hellebust TP, Siebert FA, Tanderup K. Image registration, contour propagation and dose accumulation of external beam and brachytherapy in gynecological radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2019;143:1‐11.
Joiner MC, van der Kogel AJ. Basic Clinical Radiobiology. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group; 2018.
Wigg D. Applied Radiobiology: Continuous Irradiation and Brachytherapy. Medical Physics Publishing Corporation; 2008.
Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IJ, et al. The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data. 2016;3:160018.
Potter R, Tanderup K, Kirisits C, et al. The EMBRACE II study: the outcome and prospect of two decades of evolution within the GEC‐ESTRO GYN working group and the EMBRACE studies. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2018;9:48‐60.
Kirisits C, Potter R, Lang S, Dimopoulos J, Wachter‐Gerstner N, Georg D. Dose and volume parameters for MRI‐based treatment planning in intracavitary brachytherapy for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;62:901‐911.
The American Brachytherapy Society—Ophthalmic Oncology Task Force. The American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for plaque brachytherapy of uveal melanoma and retinoblastoma. Brachytherapy. 2014;13:1‐14.