Skip to main content
. 2024 Feb 28;42(6):662–672. doi: 10.1007/s11604-024-01539-x

Table 3.

Esophageal dose comparison between the patient with grade 5 esophageal toxicity and other patients

The TRD patient (N = 1) vs. other patients (N = 15)
Dmax D0.035 cc D1cc
SBRT dose, maximum value [IQR]
 EQD2
  α/β = 2, Gy2 89 vs. 82 [32, 66] 80 vs. 74 [25, 58] 57 vs. 57 [15, 48]
  α/β = 3, Gy3 76 vs. 70 [28, 57] 68 vs. 64 [22, 50] 50 vs. 49 [14, 42]
  α/β = 10, Gy10 46 vs. 43 [20, 36] 42 vs. 40 [16, 32] 32 vs. 32 [11, 28]
 BED
  α/β = 2, Gy2 178 vs. 164 [63, 131] 160 vs. 148 [49, 116] 114 vs. 114 [29, 95]
  α/β = 3, Gy3 127 vs. 117 [47, 95] 114 vs. 106 [37, 84] 83 vs. 82 [23, 69]
  α/β = 10, Gy10 55 vs. 52 [24, 43] 51 vs. 48 [20, 39] 38 vs. 38 [13, 33]
Cumulative dose, maximum value [IQR]
 EQD2
  α/β = 2, Gy2 148 vs. 131 [76, 103] 136 vs. 120 [72, 101] 112 vs. 106 [66, 94]
  α/β = 3, Gy3 136 vs. 122 [73, 96] 125 vs. 112 [70, 95] 105 vs. 100 [63, 90]
  α/β = 10, Gy10 106 vs. 102 [74, 88] 100 vs. 97 [71, 87] 89 vs. 88 [65, 84]
 BED
  α/β = 2, Gy2 296 vs. 262 [152, 206] 272 vs. 240 [144, 202] 224 vs. 212 [132, 188]
  α/β = 3, Gy3 227 vs. 203 [121, 160] 209 vs. 187 [117, 158] 175 vs. 167 [104, 150]
  α/β = 10, Gy10 127 vs. 122 [89, 106] 120 vs. 117 [85, 104] 107 vs. 106 [78, 101]

EQD2 equivalent dose at 2 Gy, BED biological effective dose, IQR interquartile range, SBRT stereotactic body radiation therapy, Cumulative dose total dose accumulated SBRT dose and the initial external beam radiation therapy doses, Dmax the maximum dose at one point of the target volume, D0.035 cc the maximum dose that covered 0.035 cc of the target volume, D1cc the maximum dose that covered 1 cc of the target volume