Skip to main content

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

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

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)
  1. 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