Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.
Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service, Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, Melbourne, Australia; Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research and Wellness Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Radiother Oncol. 2021 Jun;159:106-111. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.03.006. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
To promote consistency in clinical trials by recommending a uniform framework as it relates to radiation transport and dose calculation in water versus in medium.
The Global Quality Assurance of Radiation Therapy Clinical Trials Harmonisation Group (GHG; www.rtqaharmonization.org) compared the differences between dose to water in water (D), dose to water in medium (D), and dose to medium in medium (D). This was done based on a review of historical frameworks, existing literature and standards, clinical issues in the context of clinical trials, and the trajectory of radiation dose calculations. Based on these factors, recommendations were developed.
No framework was found to be ideal or perfect given the history, complexity, and current status of radiation therapy. Nevertheless, based on the evidence available, the GHG established a recommendation preferring dose to medium in medium (D).
Dose to medium in medium (D) is the preferred dose calculation and reporting framework. If an institution's planning system can only calculate dose to water in water (D), this is acceptable.
通过推荐一个统一的框架，促进临床试验的一致性，涉及水中和介质中的辐射传输和剂量计算。
全球放射治疗临床试验质量保证协调组（GHG；www.rtqaharmonization.org）比较了水中的剂量到水（D）、介质中的剂量到水（D）和介质中的剂量到介质（D）之间的差异。这是基于对历史框架、现有文献和标准、临床试验背景下的临床问题以及辐射剂量计算的轨迹的审查。基于这些因素，提出了建议。
鉴于放射治疗的历史、复杂性和现状，没有一个框架被认为是理想或完美的。然而，根据现有证据，GHG 确立了一个推荐，倾向于介质中的剂量到介质（D）。
介质中的剂量到介质（D）是首选的剂量计算和报告框架。如果机构的规划系统只能计算水中的剂量到水（D），则可以接受。
