0 41

Cited 0 times in

Cited 0 times in

Defining ablative radiotherapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: An expert consensus

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorYanagihara, Ted K.-
dc.contributor.authorTepper, Joel E.-
dc.contributor.authorMoon, Andrew M.-
dc.contributor.authorBarry, Aisling S.-
dc.contributor.authorMolla, Meritxell-
dc.contributor.authorSeong, Jinsil-
dc.contributor.authorTorres, Ferrán-
dc.contributor.authorLawrence, Theodore Steven-
dc.contributor.authorReig, Maria-
dc.contributor.authorDawson, Laura A.-
dc.date.accessioned2026-05-15T02:48:10Z-
dc.date.available2026-05-15T02:48:10Z-
dc.date.created2026-05-04-
dc.date.issued2024-01-
dc.identifier.issn0732-183X-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/212356-
dc.description.abstractBackground: External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is a highly effective treatment in select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, there are many types of EBRT described in the literature with no formal definition of what constitutes “ablative.” Thus, we convened a group of international experts to provide consensus on the parameters that define ablative EBRT in HCC. Methods: A Steering Committee was convened to generate a series of Key Criteria (KC) that could be used to define ablative EBRT for HCC. KC were based on factors related to dose, fractionation, radiobiology, target identification, and delivery technique. An international panel of experts participated in a modified Delphi (mDelphi) process to independently answer questions for each KC. Respondents were given 30 days to respond in round 1 of the mDelphi and 14 days to respond in round 2. A threshold of 80 Gy, 2) daily imaging and multi-phasic contrast used for target delineation should be used, 3) treatment breaks (e.g., for adaptive EBRT) are allowed, but the total treatment time should be # 6 weeks, 4) the equivalent dose when treating with protons should use a conversion factor of 1.1, and 5) there is no single conversion factor for carbon ions. In one KC, which questioned the expert’s opinion on the a/b ratio of HCC, consensus was not achieved. Conclusions: Using an mDelphi method assessing expert opinion, we provide the first consensus definition of ablative EBRT for HCC. Empiric data are required to define the a/b of HCC. Research Sponsor: None. © (2024), (Lippincott Williams and Wilkins). All rights reserved.-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology-
dc.relation.isPartOfJournal of Clinical Oncology-
dc.relation.isPartOfJOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY-
dc.titleDefining ablative radiotherapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: An expert consensus-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.googleauthorYanagihara, Ted K.-
dc.contributor.googleauthorTepper, Joel E.-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMoon, Andrew M.-
dc.contributor.googleauthorBarry, Aisling S.-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMolla, Meritxell-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSeong, Jinsil-
dc.contributor.googleauthorTorres, Ferrán-
dc.contributor.googleauthorLawrence, Theodore Steven-
dc.contributor.googleauthorReig, Maria-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDawson, Laura A.-
dc.identifier.doi10.1200/JCO.2024.42.3_suppl.485-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ01331-
dc.identifier.eissn1527-7755-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2024.42.3_suppl.485-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorSeong, Jinsil-
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-105023319273-
dc.citation.volume42-
dc.citation.number3-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJournal of Clinical Oncology, Vol.42(3), 2024-01-
dc.identifier.rimsid92744-
dc.type.rimsART-
dc.description.journalClass1-
dc.description.journalClass1-
dc.type.docTypeArticle-
dc.description.isOpenAccessN-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassscie-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassscopus-
dc.identifier.articleno485-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Radiation Oncology (방사선종양학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.