Biphasic and monophasic repair: comparative implications for biologically equivalent dose calculations in pulsed dose rate brachytherapy of cervical carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE

To consider the implications of the use of biphasic rather than monophasic repair in calculations of biologically-equivalent doses for pulsed-dose-rate brachytherapy of cervix carcinoma.

METHODS

Calculations are presented of pulsed-dose-rate (PDR) doses equivalent to former low-dose-rate (LDR) doses, using biphasic vs monophasic repair kinetics, both for cervical carcinoma and for the organ at risk (OAR), namely the rectum. The linear-quadratic modelling calculations included effects due to varying the dose per PDR cycle, the dose reduction factor for the OAR compared with Point A, the repair kinetics and the source strength.

RESULTS

When using the recommended 1 Gy per hourly PDR cycle, different LDR-equivalent PDR rectal doses were calculated depending on the choice of monophasic or biphasic repair kinetics pertaining to the rodent central nervous and skin systems. These differences virtually disappeared when the dose per hourly cycle was increased to 1.7 Gy. This made the LDR-equivalent PDR doses more robust and independent of the choice of repair kinetics and α/β ratios as a consequence of the described concept of extended equivalence.

CONCLUSION

The use of biphasic and monophasic repair kinetics for optimised modelling of the effects on the OAR in PDR brachytherapy suggests that an optimised PDR protocol with the dose per hourly cycle nearest to 1.7 Gy could be used. Hence, the durations of the new PDR treatments would be similar to those of the former LDR treatments and not longer as currently prescribed.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

Modelling calculations indicate that equivalent PDR protocols can be developed which are less dependent on the different α/β ratios and monophasic/biphasic kinetics usually attributed to normal and tumour tissues for treatment of cervical carcinoma.