Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of included studies with hypofractionated treatment regimes. Studies published between 2003 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]      
9 Onimaru 2003 [38] 25 17–8 48/60 6/7.5 14 76.8 56.8 dens inhom corr 55 18 (2–44)
10 Xia 2006 [39] 25 ns 50 5 14 200 75 GammaKnife, ns 96 27 (24–54)
11 Fritz 2008 [40] 40 22–18 30 30 1 120 81.6 modified Batho 81 20 (6–62)
12 Onimaru 2008 [41] 41 13–28 40/48 10/12 5 105.6 75.3 ns 57 27 (9–62)
13 Baumann 2009 [42] 57 40–17 45 15 5 (4–15) 211.2 112.5 PB, dens inhom corr 92 35 (4–47)
14 Brown 2009 [43] 31 20–11 60–67.5 3–5 5 347.5 180.0 ns 86 28 (24–53)
15 Fakiris 2009 [44] 70 34–36 60/66 20/22 5 309.4 211.2 no dens inhom corr 88 50 (1–65)
16 Kopek 2009 [45] 88 51–36 45/67.5 15/22.5 5–8 112.5 60.9 Helax-TMS/ Eclipse, ns 89 44 (2–97)
17 Stephans 2009 [46] 56 42–14 50 10 11 (8–14) 168 100.0 dens inhom corr 97 20 (2–48)
18 Baba 2010 [47] 124 87–37 48/52 12/13 11 105.6/119.6 75.3/84.9 PB convol with Batho 80 26 (7–66) (living pats)
19 Crabtree 2010 [48] 76 57–19 54 18 8–14 219.4 151.2 Trilogy, ns 89 19
20 Timmerman 2010 [49] 55 44–11 54 18 14 286.4 151.2 dens inhom corr 98 34 (5–50)
21 Videtic 2010 [50] 26 22–6 50 10 5 112.3 100 dens inhom corr 94 31 (10–51)
22 Andratschke 2011 [51] 92 31–61 24/45 3/5 5–12 192.2 84.4 dens inhom corr 83 21 (3–87)
23 Hamamoto 2012 [52] 128 101–27 48/60 9.2–14 4–10 105.6 89.9 PB, no dens inhom corr 85 18 (1–60)
24 Lagerwaard 2012 [53] 177 106–71 60 12 20 7.5 14 187.5 132.0 Brainlab, ns 93 32
  Shibamoto 2012 [54]        75.3 PB convo, Batho 83 36
25a Shibamoto, d2 124 124 T1 48 12 9–21 105.6 75.3   86  
25b Shibamoto, d3 52 52 T2 52 13 9–21 119.6 84.9   73  
  Shirata 2012 [55]   63–18      89.9 PB convolution Batho 89 30 (0.3–79)
26a Shirata, d1 45   48 12   105.6 89.9   100  
26b Shirata, d2 29   60 7.5   105 91.4   82  
  Takeda 2012 [56]         XiO/CMS, CS   
27a Takeda, d1 27 10–17 40 8 5 100 72.0   72 21 (6–64)
27b Takeda, d2 138 91–47 50 10 5 140.6 100.0   87 21 (6–64)
28 Inoue 2013 [57] 109 79–30 45/48 15/12 4–7 105.6 75.3 dens inhom corr 81 25 (4–72)
29 Takeda 2013 [58] 109 67–42 40/50 8/10 5 140.6 100 convolution-superposition 84.4 24 (3–65)
30 Hamaji 2015 [59] 104 75–29 48 12 5 105.6 75.3 PB convol, Batho 76.7 43 (6–115)
31 Rwigema [60] 46 - 54 18 5 234.5 151.2 MC 95.5 16.8 (0.6–38.9)
  Median 57   56.0 12.5 7 119.8 89.9   86 27.0 (0.3–115)
  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, dens inhom corr density inhomogeneity correction, PB convol pencil beam convolution, CS convolution superposition