Challenges in radiobiological modeling: can we decide between LQ and LQ-L models based on reviewed clinical NSCLC treatment outcome data?

Table 1 Characteristics of included studies with conventionally fractionated treatment regimes. Studies published between 1993 and 2015

No.	Reference	No. pats.	No. of pats. with stage T1 - T2	Fractionation regime			BED₁₀@ isoc [Gy]	BED₁₀@ PTV edge [Gy]	Dose calculation algorithm	3y-LC [%]	Follow-up Median (range) [m]
				D [Gy]	d [Gy]	T [d]
1	Kaskowitz 1993 [30]	53	20–33	63 (40–80)	conventional	ns	74.3	69.6	ns	51	ns
2	Jeremic 1997 [31]	49	25–24	69.6	1.2 (2× day)	40	78.0	70.8	ns	55	ns
3	Hayakawa 1999 [32]	36	7–29	60–81	2	48	80.4	75.7	no dens corr	72	(36–216)
4	Cheung 2002 [33]	33	18–15	48	4	21	67.2	62.9	dens corr	63	23
5	Langendijk 2002 [34]	46	26–20	70	2	49	84.0	79.1	dens corr	50	36
6	Bradley 2003 [35]	56	31–25	60–84	1.8–2	42–56	83.7	78.6	no dens corr	63	20 (6–72)
7	Bogart 2005	31	19–12	70	2.3–3.7	39	87.5	83.3	ns	83	29
8	Zehentmayr 2015 [36]	40	19 (Ia)–21 (Ib)	79.2 (73.8–90)	1.8 (2× day)	30–42	93.5	87.5	ns	91	28.5 (2–108)
	Median	43		69.8	2.0	44	82.0	77.2		63	28.5 (2–216)

BED ₁₀ biologically effective dose with α/β = 10 Gy, PTV planning target volume, D total dose, d dose per fraction, T total treatment time, LC local control, ns not specified

ISSN: 1748-717X