FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1974741678> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1974741678 endingPage "S788" @default.
• W1974741678 startingPage "S788" @default.
• W1974741678 abstract "Purpose/Objective(s)The purpose of this in vivo study was to investigate the tumor control and normal tissue toxicity of pulsed low dose rate radiation therapy (PLRT) for recurrent lung cancer.Materials/MethodsThis study consisted of two experiments: (1) total body irradiation (TBI) to investigate the normal tissue toxicity of PLRT and (2) PLRT treatment of A549 tumor-bearing mice to investigate the tumor local control. For the TBI experiment, 20 mice were divided into two groups randomly. One group was irradiated continuously at a dose rate of 300 MU/min. The other group was irradiated with 40×0.2Gy pulses with a 3min internal. The total body radiation dose was 8Gy in one treatment. The weight of each mouse was measured daily. For the A549 tumor treatment experiment, 1×106 A549 cells were injected subcutaneously into the left and right abdominal region. The tumor-bearing mice were randomly assigned to three groups: (1) control group (n = 10), (2) conventional RT group (n = 10), and (3) PLRT group (n = 10). When the tumor volume reached approximately 80 mm3, treatment was initiated. All treatments were delivered in two fractions of 2Gy each in two consecutive days. Following the treatment, mice were MR-scanned weekly and the tumor volumes were measured using MRI (resolution: 0.2mm) for tumor growth monitoring.ResultsIn the TBI experiment, there was a significant difference in the weight and survival time between the mice treated with conventional RT and PLRT; the average weight of the conventional RT group decreased continuously from 26.55±0.93g to 20.94±1.68g while the PLRT group showed no change in weight, and the survival time for the conventional RT group was eight days and for the PLRT group it was twelve days. For the tumor control experiment using the A549 xenograft model, the results showed that both conventional RT and PLRT could significantly inhibited the growth of A549 tumors compared with the untreated control group (>35% difference in the mean tumor volume). The PLRT results were slightly better than the conventional RT treatment in terms of the mean tumor volume although there was no significant difference (8% difference in the mean tumor volume) between the two groups.ConclusionsThis study showed that pulsed low dose rate radiation therapy (PLRT) could control A549 tumors as effectively as conventional RT with less normal tissue toxicity. Thus, PLRT would be a good modality for treating recurrent lung cancers. Purpose/Objective(s)The purpose of this in vivo study was to investigate the tumor control and normal tissue toxicity of pulsed low dose rate radiation therapy (PLRT) for recurrent lung cancer. The purpose of this in vivo study was to investigate the tumor control and normal tissue toxicity of pulsed low dose rate radiation therapy (PLRT) for recurrent lung cancer. Materials/MethodsThis study consisted of two experiments: (1) total body irradiation (TBI) to investigate the normal tissue toxicity of PLRT and (2) PLRT treatment of A549 tumor-bearing mice to investigate the tumor local control. For the TBI experiment, 20 mice were divided into two groups randomly. One group was irradiated continuously at a dose rate of 300 MU/min. The other group was irradiated with 40×0.2Gy pulses with a 3min internal. The total body radiation dose was 8Gy in one treatment. The weight of each mouse was measured daily. For the A549 tumor treatment experiment, 1×106 A549 cells were injected subcutaneously into the left and right abdominal region. The tumor-bearing mice were randomly assigned to three groups: (1) control group (n = 10), (2) conventional RT group (n = 10), and (3) PLRT group (n = 10). When the tumor volume reached approximately 80 mm3, treatment was initiated. All treatments were delivered in two fractions of 2Gy each in two consecutive days. Following the treatment, mice were MR-scanned weekly and the tumor volumes were measured using MRI (resolution: 0.2mm) for tumor growth monitoring. This study consisted of two experiments: (1) total body irradiation (TBI) to investigate the normal tissue toxicity of PLRT and (2) PLRT treatment of A549 tumor-bearing mice to investigate the tumor local control. For the TBI experiment, 20 mice were divided into two groups randomly. One group was irradiated continuously at a dose rate of 300 MU/min. The other group was irradiated with 40×0.2Gy pulses with a 3min internal. The total body radiation dose was 8Gy in one treatment. The weight of each mouse was measured daily. For the A549 tumor treatment experiment, 1×106 A549 cells were injected subcutaneously into the left and right abdominal region. The tumor-bearing mice were randomly assigned to three groups: (1) control group (n = 10), (2) conventional RT group (n = 10), and (3) PLRT group (n = 10). When the tumor volume reached approximately 80 mm3, treatment was initiated. All treatments were delivered in two fractions of 2Gy each in two consecutive days. Following the treatment, mice were MR-scanned weekly and the tumor volumes were measured using MRI (resolution: 0.2mm) for tumor growth monitoring. ResultsIn the TBI experiment, there was a significant difference in the weight and survival time between the mice treated with conventional RT and PLRT; the average weight of the conventional RT group decreased continuously from 26.55±0.93g to 20.94±1.68g while the PLRT group showed no change in weight, and the survival time for the conventional RT group was eight days and for the PLRT group it was twelve days. For the tumor control experiment using the A549 xenograft model, the results showed that both conventional RT and PLRT could significantly inhibited the growth of A549 tumors compared with the untreated control group (>35% difference in the mean tumor volume). The PLRT results were slightly better than the conventional RT treatment in terms of the mean tumor volume although there was no significant difference (8% difference in the mean tumor volume) between the two groups. In the TBI experiment, there was a significant difference in the weight and survival time between the mice treated with conventional RT and PLRT; the average weight of the conventional RT group decreased continuously from 26.55±0.93g to 20.94±1.68g while the PLRT group showed no change in weight, and the survival time for the conventional RT group was eight days and for the PLRT group it was twelve days. For the tumor control experiment using the A549 xenograft model, the results showed that both conventional RT and PLRT could significantly inhibited the growth of A549 tumors compared with the untreated control group (>35% difference in the mean tumor volume). The PLRT results were slightly better than the conventional RT treatment in terms of the mean tumor volume although there was no significant difference (8% difference in the mean tumor volume) between the two groups. ConclusionsThis study showed that pulsed low dose rate radiation therapy (PLRT) could control A549 tumors as effectively as conventional RT with less normal tissue toxicity. Thus, PLRT would be a good modality for treating recurrent lung cancers. This study showed that pulsed low dose rate radiation therapy (PLRT) could control A549 tumors as effectively as conventional RT with less normal tissue toxicity. Thus, PLRT would be a good modality for treating recurrent lung cancers." @default.
• W1974741678 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1974741678 creator A5008184726 @default.
• W1974741678 creator A5013903102 @default.
• W1974741678 creator A5030724987 @default.
• W1974741678 creator A5053311266 @default.
• W1974741678 creator A5074135001 @default.
• W1974741678 creator A5083706689 @default.
• W1974741678 creator A5085568091 @default.
• W1974741678 date "2014-09-01" @default.
• W1974741678 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W1974741678 title "Local Tumor Control and Normal Tissue Toxicity of Pulsed Low-Dose-Rate Radiation Therapy (PLRT) for Recurrent Lung Cancer: An In Vivo Study" @default.
• W1974741678 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.05.2278" @default.
• W1974741678 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W1974741678 type Work @default.
• W1974741678 sameAs 1974741678 @default.
• W1974741678 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W1974741678 countsByYear W19747416782023 @default.
• W1974741678 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1974741678 hasAuthorship W1974741678A5008184726 @default.
• W1974741678 hasAuthorship W1974741678A5013903102 @default.
• W1974741678 hasAuthorship W1974741678A5030724987 @default.
• W1974741678 hasAuthorship W1974741678A5053311266 @default.
• W1974741678 hasAuthorship W1974741678A5074135001 @default.
• W1974741678 hasAuthorship W1974741678A5083706689 @default.
• W1974741678 hasAuthorship W1974741678A5085568091 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C143998085 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C150903083 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C207001950 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C2776256026 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C2777714996 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C29730261 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C509974204 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C121608353 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C126322002 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C126838900 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C143998085 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C150903083 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C207001950 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C2776256026 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C2777714996 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C29730261 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C509974204 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C71924100 @default.
• W1974741678 hasConceptScore W1974741678C86803240 @default.
• W1974741678 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W1974741678 hasLocation W19747416781 @default.
• W1974741678 hasOpenAccess W1974741678 @default.
• W1974741678 hasPrimaryLocation W19747416781 @default.
• W1974741678 hasRelatedWork W1968701816 @default.
• W1974741678 hasRelatedWork W2021792849 @default.
• W1974741678 hasRelatedWork W2067694292 @default.
• W1974741678 hasRelatedWork W2072198761 @default.
• W1974741678 hasRelatedWork W2157355069 @default.
• W1974741678 hasRelatedWork W2345263070 @default.
• W1974741678 hasRelatedWork W2350538445 @default.
• W1974741678 hasRelatedWork W2418264232 @default.
• W1974741678 hasRelatedWork W2796160847 @default.
• W1974741678 hasRelatedWork W303802408 @default.
• W1974741678 hasVolume "90" @default.
• W1974741678 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1974741678 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1974741678 magId "1974741678" @default.
• W1974741678 workType "article" @default.