-
F1000Research 2022Novel Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) can affect multiple organs, including the lungs, resulting in pneumonia. Apart from steroids, other anti-COVID drugs that...
Novel Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) can affect multiple organs, including the lungs, resulting in pneumonia. Apart from steroids, other anti-COVID drugs that have been studied appear to have little or no effect on COVID-19 pneumonia. There is a well-known history of inflammatory disease, including pneumonia, treated with low-dose radiation therapy (LDRT). It reduces the production of proinflammatory cytokines, Interleukin-1a (IL-1a), and leukocyte recruitment. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar, with keywords such as "radiotherapy," "low-dose radiation therapy," "low-dose irradiation," "covid-19 pneumonia," "SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia," and "covid pneumonia." with additional filters for human studies and customized articles in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. We reviewed randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies with a clearly defined intervention, including low-dose radiotherapy alone or in combination with any therapy to treat COVID-19 pneumonia from December 2019 to May 2021. Patients receiving standard or high-dose radiotherapy, including for other diseases, were excluded. Zotero software was used to collect and organize research from various databases, remove duplicates, extract relevant data, and record decisions. Participants' demographics and baseline status were obtained from the full-text articles along with the intervention's outcome/effect on patient status. Four studies with 61 participants that met the inclusion criteria were included. One was a double-blind randomized controlled trial, one a non-randomized trial, while the other two were single-arm clinical trials. Low-dose radiation therapy did not show any significant improvement in COVID-19 patients. Only two studies included in this review demonstrated an improvement in inflammatory markers; however, patients were also given steroids or other drugs. Therefore, the confounding effects must be considered before drawing conclusions. This systematic review does not support mortality benefit, clinical course improvement, or imaging changes with LDRT.
Topics: Humans; Case-Control Studies; COVID-19; Cross-Sectional Studies; Double-Blind Method; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; SARS-CoV-2; Radiotherapy Dosage
PubMed: 35186275
DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.74558.1 -
Physica Medica : PM : An International... Feb 2022Patient shielding during medical X-ray imaging has been increasingly criticized in the last years due to growing evidence that it often provides minimal benefit and may... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Patient shielding during medical X-ray imaging has been increasingly criticized in the last years due to growing evidence that it often provides minimal benefit and may even compromise image quality. In Europe, and as also shown in a short assessment in Switzerland, the use of patient shielding is inhomogeneous. The aim of this study was to systematically review recent literature in order to assess benefits and appraise disadvantages related to the routine use of patient shielding.
METHODS
To evaluate benefits and disadvantages related to the application of patient shielding in radiological procedures, a systematic literature review was performed for CT, radiography, mammography and fluoroscopy-guided medical X-ray imaging. In addition, reports from medical physics societies and authorities of different countries were considered in the evaluation.
RESULTS
The literature review revealed 479 papers and reports on the topic, from which 87 qualified for closer analysis. The review considered in- and out-of-plane patient shielding as well as shielding for pregnant and pediatric patients. Dose savings and other dose and non-dose related effects of patient shielding were considered in the evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS
Although patient shielding has been used in radiological practice for many years, its use is no longer undisputed. The evaluation of the systematic literature review of recent studies and reports shows that dose savings are rather minimal while significant dose- and non-dose-related detrimental effects are present. Consequently, the routine usage of patient protection shielding in medical X-ray imaging can be safely discontinued for all modalities and patient groups.
Topics: Child; Female; Fluoroscopy; Humans; Pregnancy; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Protection; Radiography; Radiology; X-Rays
PubMed: 35030383
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2021.12.016 -
European Radiology May 2022To determine the difference in CT values and image quality of abdominal CT images reconstructed by filtered back-projection (FBP), hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To determine the difference in CT values and image quality of abdominal CT images reconstructed by filtered back-projection (FBP), hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR), and deep learning reconstruction (DLR).
METHODS
PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for articles regarding CT densitometry in the abdomen and the image reconstruction techniques FBP, hybrid IR, and DLR. Mean differences in CT values between reconstruction techniques were analyzed. A comparison between signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of FBP, hybrid IR, and DLR was made. A comparison of diagnostic confidence between hybrid IR and DLR was made.
RESULTS
Sixteen articles were included, six being suitable for meta-analysis. In the liver, the mean difference between hybrid IR and DLR was - 0.633 HU (p = 0.483, SD ± 0.902 HU). In the spleen, the mean difference between hybrid IR and DLR was - 0.099 HU (p = 0.925, SD ± 1.061 HU). In the pancreas, the mean difference between hybrid IR and DLR was - 1.372 HU (p = 0.353, SD ± 1.476 HU). In 14 articles, CNR was described. In all cases, DLR showed a significantly higher CNR. In 9 articles, SNR was described. In all cases but one, DLR showed a significantly higher SNR. In all cases, DLR showed a significantly higher diagnostic confidence.
CONCLUSIONS
There were no significant differences in CT values reconstructed by FBP, hybrid IR, and DLR in abdominal organs. This shows that these reconstruction techniques are consistent in reconstructing CT values. DLR images showed a significantly higher SNR and CNR, compared to FBP and hybrid IR.
KEY POINTS
CT values of abdominal CT images are similar between deep learning reconstruction (DLR), filtered back-projection (FBP), and hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR). DLR results in improved image quality in terms of SNR and CNR compared to FBP and hybrid IR images. DLR can thus be safely implemented in the clinical setting resulting in improved image quality without affecting CT values.
Topics: Abdomen; Algorithms; Deep Learning; Densitometry; Humans; Radiation Dosage; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; Tomography, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 34913104
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-08438-z -
Medicine Dec 2021Conventionally fractionated radiotherapy is a common treatment for men with localized prostate cancer. A growing consensus suggests that stereotactic body radiation...
BACKGROUND
Conventionally fractionated radiotherapy is a common treatment for men with localized prostate cancer. A growing consensus suggests that stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is similarly effective but less costly and more convenient for patients. The SpaceOAR hydrogel rectal spacer placed between the prostate and rectum reduces radiation-induced rectal injury in patients receiving conventionally fractionated radiotherapy, but spacer efficacy with SBRT is unclear. The purpose of this research was to assess the clinical utility of the hydrogel rectal spacer in men receiving SBRT for prostate cancer.
METHODS
We performed systematic searches of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies in men who received the SpaceOAR hydrogel spacer prior to SBRT (≥5.0 Gy fractions) for treatment of localized prostate center. Rectal irradiation results were compared to controls without spacer implant; all other outcomes were reported descriptively owing to lack of comparative data incuding perirectal separation distance, rectal irradiation on a dosimetric curve, gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, and freedom from biochemical failure. GI toxicity was reported as the risk of a grade 2 or 3+ bowel complication in early (≤3 months) and late (>3 months) follow-up.
RESULTS
In 11 studies with 780 patients, SBRT protocols ranged from 7 to 10 Gy per fraction with total dose ranging from 19 to 45 Gy. Perirectal distance achieved with the rectal spacer ranged from 9.6 to 14.5 mm (median 10.8 mm). Compared to controls receiving no spacer, SpaceOAR placement reduced the radiation delivered to the rectum by 29% to 56% across a dosimetric profile curve. In early follow-up, grade 2 GI complications were reported in 7.0% of patients and no early grade 3+ GI complications were reported. In late follow-up, the corresponding rates were 2.3% for grade 2 and 0.3% for grade 3 GI toxicity. Over 16 months median follow-up, freedom from biochemical failure ranged from 96.4% to 100% (pooled mean 97.4%).
CONCLUSIONS
SpaceOAR hydrogel spacer placed between the prostate and rectum prior to SBRT is a promising preventative strategy that increases the distance between the prostate and rectum, reduces rectal radiation exposure, and may lower the risk of clinically important GI complications.
Topics: Humans; Hydrogels; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms; Radiation Injuries; Radiosurgery; Radiotherapy Dosage
PubMed: 34889268
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000028111 -
BioMed Research International 2021The previous lab and clinical studies of the correlation between the ultraviolet B and age-related cataract (ARC) did not reach in the universal agreement, especially in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The previous lab and clinical studies of the correlation between the ultraviolet B and age-related cataract (ARC) did not reach in the universal agreement, especially in different morphological types of ARC. It is important to systemically summarize those previous data of epidemiological studies, which might penetrate the relevance between three morphological types of ARC, cortical, nuclear, and posterior capsular (PSC), with sunlight exposure.
METHODS
PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI, Embase, and Cochrane were searched online. Data were extracted and recalculated, and quality check was performed by hand. Review Manager was used to perform the fixed effects meta-analysis on ARC and its morphological types. The highest exposed dose group was defined as the exposed group, and the lowest dose group as the control group as possible.
RESULTS
Finally, the number of analyzed studies was 31: 20 for ARC and twelve, eleven, and nine for the morphological types cortical, nuclear, and PSC, respectively. The pooled OR for ARC was 1.15 (range 1.00~43.78, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.21). The cortical cataract revealed a slightly higher risk, and pooled OR was 1.03 (range 0.67~2.91, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.03). But the pooled OR for nuclear and PSC were 1.00 (range 0.50~5.35, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.00) and 0.99 (range 0.57~1.87, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.01), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
The systemic analysis of epidemiological articles reported till now reveals a significantly increased risk of ARC for those exposed with more sunlight, especially the morphological type of cortical cataract.
Topics: Aging; Cataract; Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation; Humans; Risk Factors; Sunlight; Ultraviolet Rays
PubMed: 34805407
DOI: 10.1155/2021/8748463 -
Oncology Research and Treatment 2021This study aimed to systematically present application situation and therapeutic effect of proton therapy (PT), heavy ion therapy, and helical tomotherapy (TOMO) for...
PURPOSE
This study aimed to systematically present application situation and therapeutic effect of proton therapy (PT), heavy ion therapy, and helical tomotherapy (TOMO) for gastric cancer (GC), and to find gaps of existing studies.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Chinese Biological Medical Database were searched. Tables, bubble plot, and heat map were conducted to display results.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies were included. About PT, 7 single-arm studies showed median overall survival (OS) within 2-66 months and 1 study reported 40% of patients happened moderate degree of radiation gastritis. About TOMO, 1 study reported longer median OS and progression-free survival, lower occurrence of Grade III toxicity, and late toxicity compared to 3D-CRT, while another study remained neutral. About heavy ion therapy, there was no clinical study was found.
CONCLUSIONS
Existing studies presented good clinic treatment effect about PT and TOMO for GC, and furthermore clinical studies are needed.
Topics: Heavy Ion Radiotherapy; Humans; Proton Therapy; Protons; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 34695829
DOI: 10.1159/000518997 -
Radiotherapy and Oncology : Journal of... Nov 2021Breast cancer radiotherapy can increase the risk of subsequent primary oesophageal cancer, with risk increasing according to oesophagus radiation dose. We describe...
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Breast cancer radiotherapy can increase the risk of subsequent primary oesophageal cancer, with risk increasing according to oesophagus radiation dose. We describe oesophagus exposure from modern breast cancer regimens and discuss the risks of oesophageal cancer for women irradiated recently.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review was undertaken of oesophagus doses from breast cancer radiotherapy regimens published during 2010-2020. Mean and maximum oesophagus doses were described for different target regions irradiated and different radiotherapy techniques.
RESULTS
In 112 published regimens from 18 countries, oesophagus doses varied with target region. For partial breast irradiation, average mean oesophagus dose was 0.2 Gy (range 0.1-0.4) in four regimens; maximum dose was not reported. For breast or chest wall radiotherapy, average oesophagus doses were mean 1.8 Gy (range 0.1-10.4) in 24 regimens and maximum 6.7 Gy (range 0.4-14.3) in seven regimens. For radiotherapy including a nodal region, average oesophagus doses were higher: mean 11.4 Gy (range <0.1-29.3) in 61 regimens and maximum 34.4 Gy (range 3.4-51.3) in 55 regimens. Average mean oesophagus doses were >10 Gy for intensity modulated nodal radiotherapy, but lower for other node techniques.
CONCLUSIONS
Mean oesophagus doses from partial breast and breast/chest wall regimens were usually less than 2 Gy, hence radiation-risks will be very small. However, for radiotherapy including lymph nodes, average mean oesophagus dose of 11.4 Gy may nearly double oesophageal cancer risk. Consideration of oesophageal exposure during nodal radiotherapy planning may reduce the risks of radiation-related oesophageal cancer for women irradiated today.
Topics: Breast; Breast Neoplasms; Esophagus; Female; Humans; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated; Thoracic Wall
PubMed: 34626725
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.09.032 -
Thyroid : Official Journal of the... Dec 2021Patients with Graves' disease are commonly treated with radioiodine. There remains controversy over whether the aim of treatment should be to achieve euthyroidism or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between the Radiation Absorbed Dose to the Thyroid and Response in Patients Treated with Radioiodine for Graves' Disease.
Patients with Graves' disease are commonly treated with radioiodine. There remains controversy over whether the aim of treatment should be to achieve euthyroidism or hypothyroidism, and whether treatments should be administered with standard levels of radioactivity or personalized according to the radiation absorbed doses delivered to the thyroid. The aim of this review was to investigate whether a relationship exists between radiation absorbed dose and treatment outcome. A systematic review and meta-analysis of all reports published before February 13, 2020, were performed using PubMed, Web of Science, OVID MEDLINE, and Embase. Proportion of patients achieving nonhyperthyroid status was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were proportion of patients who were specifically euthyroid or hypothyroid. A random-effects meta-analysis of proportions was performed for primary and secondary outcomes, and the impact of the radiation absorbed dose on treatment outcome was assessed through meta-regression. The study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020175010). A total of 1122 studies were identified of which 15, comprising 2303 Graves' disease patients, were eligible for the meta-analysis. A strong association was found between radiation absorbed dose and nonhyperthyroid and hypothyroid outcomes (odds ratio [OR] = 1.11 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.08-1.14] and OR = 1.09 [CI 1.06-1.12] per 10 Gy increase). Higher rates of euthyroid outcome were found for radiation absorbed doses within the range 120-180 Gy when compared with outside this range ( = 1172, OR = 2.50 [CI 1.17-5.35], = 0.018). A maximum euthyroid response of 38% was identified at a radiation absorbed dose of 128 Gy. The presented radiation absorbed dose-response relationships can facilitate personalized treatment planning for radioiodine treatment of patients with Graves' disease. Further studies are required to determine how patient-specific covariates can inform personalized treatments.
Topics: Graves Disease; Humans; Iodine Radioisotopes; Radiotherapy Dosage; Thyroid Gland
PubMed: 34598656
DOI: 10.1089/thy.2021.0302 -
Radiotherapy and Oncology : Journal of... Nov 2021Patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) treated with chemoradiation often experience hematologic toxicity (HT), as chemoradiation can induce bone marrow... (Review)
Review
Correlations between bone marrow radiation dose and hematologic toxicity in locally advanced cervical cancer patients receiving chemoradiation with cisplatin: a systematic review.
Patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) treated with chemoradiation often experience hematologic toxicity (HT), as chemoradiation can induce bone marrow (BM) suppression. Studies on the relationship between BM dosimetric parameters and clinically significant HT might provide relevant indices for developing BM sparing (BMS) radiotherapy techniques. This systematic review studied the relationship between BM dose and HT in patients with LACC treated with primary cisplatin-based chemoradiation. A systematic search was conducted in Embase, Medline, and Web of Science. Eligibility criteria were treatment of LACC-patients with cisplatin-based chemoradiation and report of HT or complete blood cell count (CBC). The search identified 1346 papers, which were screened on title and abstract before two reviewers independently evaluated the full-text. 17 articles were included and scored according to a selection of the TRIPOD criteria. The mean TRIPOD score was 12.1 out of 29. Fourteen studies defining BM as the whole pelvic bone contour (PB) detected significant associations with V10 (3/14), V20 (6/14), and V40 (4/11). Recommended cut-off values were V10 > 95-75%, V20 > 80-65%, and V40 > 37-28%. The studies using lower density marrow spaces (PBM) or active bone marrow (ABM) as a proxy for BM only found limited associations with HT. Our study was the first literature review providing an overview of articles evaluating the correlation between BM and HT for patients with LACC undergoing cisplatin-based chemoradiation. There is a scarcity of studies independently validating developed prediction models between BM dose and HT. Future studies may use PB contouring to develop normal tissue complication probability models.
Topics: Bone Marrow; Chemoradiotherapy; Cisplatin; Female; Humans; Radiation Dosage; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 34560187
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.09.009 -
Medicine Sep 2021The present network meta-analysis was conducted to perform an indirect comparison among ramucirumab, regorafenib, and cabozantinib in patients with advanced... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy and safety for second-line treatment with ramucirumab, regorafenib, and cabozantinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma progressed on sorafenib treatment: A network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The present network meta-analysis was conducted to perform an indirect comparison among ramucirumab, regorafenib, and cabozantinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progressed on sorafenib treatment.
METHODS
A systematic review through Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library was developed, with eligible randomized clinical trials been included. Hazard ratios (HRs) including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), odds ratios of disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events were compared indirectly with network meta-analysis using random model in software STATA version 13.0.
RESULTS
A total of 4 randomized clinical trials including 2137 patients met the eligibility criteria and enrolled. Indirect comparisons showed that there was no statistical difference observed in the indirect comparison of PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR among agents of regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab in advanced HCC patients with elevated α-fetoprotein (AFP) (400 ng/mL or higher). However, in patients with low-level AFP (lower than 400 ng/mL), regorafenib was the only agent associated with significant superiority in OS, compared with placebo (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI, 0.50-0.90).
CONCLUSIONS
The present network meta-analysis revealed that there might be no statistical difference observed in the indirect comparison of PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR among regorafenib, cabozantinib, or ramucirumab in advanced HCC patients with elevated AFP (400 ng/mL or higher). However, in patients with low-level AFP (lower than 400 ng/mL), regorafenib might be associated with significant superiority in OS, compared to placebo, which need further investigation in clinical practice.
Topics: Anilides; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Liver Neoplasms; Neoplasm Metastasis; Phenylurea Compounds; Pyridines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sorafenib; Ramucirumab
PubMed: 34559096
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000027013