@article {65, title = {Data from: Benefit of particle therapy in re-irradiation of head and neck patients. Results of a multicenter in silico ROCOCO trial}, year = {2016}, abstract = {

Background and Purpose

In this multicentric in silico trial we compared photon, proton, and carbon ion radiotherapy plans for re-irradiation of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) regarding dose to tumour and doses to surrounding organs at risk (OARs).

Material and Methods

Twenty-five HNSCC patients with a second new or recurrent cancer after previous irradiation (70 Gy) were included. Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and ion therapy (IMIT) re-irradiation plans to, again, a total dose of 70 Gy were compared to photon therapy delivered with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT).

Results

When comparing IMIT and IMPT to VMAT the mean dose to all 22 OARs was statistically significantly reduced for IMIT and to 15 out of 22 OARs (68\%) using IMPT. The maximum dose to 2\% volume (D2) of the brainstem and spinal cord were statistically significantly reduced using IMPT and IMIT compared to VMAT. The data are available on www.cancerdata.org.

Conclusions

In this ROCOCO in silico trial, a reduction in mean dose to OARs was achieved using particle therapy compared to photons in the re-irradiation of HNSCC. There was a dosimetric benefit favouring carbon-ions above proton therapy. These dose reductions may potentially translate into lower severe complication rates related to the re-irradiation.

}, doi = {10.17195/candat.2016.04.2}, author = {Danielle Eekers and Erik Roelofs and Urszula Jelen and Maura Kirk and Marlies Granzier and Filippo Ammazzalorso and Peter H. Ahn and Geert O.R.J Janssens and Frank Hoebers and Tobias Friedmann and Timothy Solberg and Sean Walsh and Esther G C Troost and Johannes H.A.M. Kaanders and Philippe Lambin} } @article {75, title = {Data from: Quantitative assessment of Zirconium-89 labeled cetuximab using PETCT imaging in patients with advanced head and neck cancer - a theragnostic approach}, year = {2016}, abstract = {

Biomarkers predicting treatment response to the monoclonal antibody cetuximab in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (LAHNSCC) are lacking. We hypothesize that tumor accessibility is an important factor in treatment success of the EGFR targeting drug. We quantified uptake of cetuximab labeled with Zirconium-89 (89Zr) using PET/CT imaging.
Seventeen patients with stage III-IV LAHNSCC received a loading dose unlabeled cetuximab, followed by 10 mg 54.5{\textpm}9.6 MBq 89Zr-cetuximab. PET/CT images were acquired either 3 and 6 or 4 and 7 days post-injection. 89Zr-cetuximab uptake was quantified using standardized uptake value (SUV) and tumor-to-background ratio (TBR), and correlated to EGFR immunohistochemistry. TBR was compared between scan days to determine optimal timing.
Uptake of 89Zr-cetuximab varied between patients (day 6-7: SUVpeak range 2.5-6.2). TBR increased significantly (49{\textpm}28\%, p\<0.01) between first (1.1{\textpm}0.3) and second scan (1.7{\textpm}0.6). Between groups with a low and high EGFR expression a significant difference in SUVmean (2.1 versus 3.0) and SUVpeak (3.2 versus 4.7) was found, however, not in TBR. Data is available at www.cancerdata.org.
In conclusion, 89Zr-cetuximab PET imaging shows large inter-patient variety in LAHNSCC and provides additional information over FDG-PET and EGFR expression. Validation of the predictive value is recommended with scans acquired 6-7 days post-injection.

Examples scans for four patients are provided. All patients received a planning PET/CT and two 89Zr-cetuximab scans. \ Patient P0037C0006I4475579 and P0037C0006I5879176 underwent 89Zr-cetuximab scans at 4 and 7 days post-injection; patient P0037C0006I6042760 and P0037C0006I8991415 at 3 and 6 days post-injection. All 89Zr-cetuximab PET scans are corrected for attenuation, scatter and 89Zr decay.

}, keywords = {cetuximab, EGFR, Immuno-PET, LAHNSCC, zirconium-89}, doi = {10.17195/candat.2016.11.1}, author = {Aniek Even and Olga Hamming-Vrieze and Wouter van Elmpt and V{\'e}ronique Winnepenninckx and Jolien Heukelom and Margot Tesselaar and Wouter Vogel and Ann Hoeben and Catharina M.L. Zegers and Danielle Vugts and Guus Van Dongen and Harry Bartelink and Felix Mottaghy and Frank Hoebers and Philippe Lambin} } @article {57, title = {Data from: Development and Evaluation of an Online Three-Level Proton vs Photon Decision Support Prototype for Head and Neck Cancer - Comparison of Dose, Toxicity and Cost-Effectiveness}, year = {2015}, month = {10/2015}, publisher = {CancerData}, abstract = {

This dataset supports the publication by Cheng et al, entitled "Development and Evaluation of an Online Three-Level Proton vs Photon Decision Support Prototype for Head and Neck Cancer - Comparison of Dose, Toxicity and Cost-Effectiveness". It\ was used to evaluate the PRODECIS decision support prototype\ for online evaluation of eligiblilty for proton therapy using Dutch guidelines.\ 

The Head and Neck test dataset was based on the ROCOCO dataset by HP van der Laan, as described in doi:10.3109/0284186X.2012.692885.

}, keywords = {cancer, decision support, model-based, oncology, proton therapy, radiotherapy planning}, doi = {10.17195/candat.2015.10.5}, url = {https://www.cancerdata.org/resource/doi:10.17195/candat.2015.10.5}, author = {Qing Cheng and Erik Roelofs and Bram Ramaekers and Danielle Eekers and Johan van Soest and Tim Lustberg and Frank Hoebers and Hans Paul van der Laan and Erik Korevaar and Andr{\'e} Dekker and Johannes Langendijk and Philippe Lambin} } Error | CancerData.org

Error

The website encountered an unexpected error. Please try again later.