How fast is repopulation of tumor cells during the treatment gap?
Abstract
Purpose/objective Our goal was to analyze the repopulation of surviving tumor cells during a treatment gap in radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer. Methods and materials Clinical material is based on the records of 1502 patients treated by radiotherapy alone in Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Institute in Gliwice during the period between1980 and 1989. All patients had histologically confirmed squamous cell carcinoma of the larynx or pharynx. The mean gap duration was 9 days. Only 10% of patients were treated without gaps. The dose per fraction was in the range of 1.5 to 2.5 Gy. Patient data were fitted directly to the mixed linear-quadratic model using maximum-likelihood estimation. Tumor stage or tumor localization was introduced into the equation as a categorical variable. Tumor proliferation was estimated by dividing the treatment gaps into three groups: the first 2 weeks, second 2 weeks, and the period after 4 weeks of irradiation. Results Tumor control probability was significantly correlated with radiation dose, tumor progression (according to TNM), overall treatment time, and gap duration. Laryngeal cancers had a better prognosis than cancers of the oro- and nasopharynx. Significant tumor repopulation was found after the first 2 weeks of radiotherapy. During the treatment gap, the proliferation rate was equal to 0.75 Gy/day. During the days with irradiation, repopulation was slower and equal to 0.2 Gy/day. Conclusion The repopulation of tumor cells is faster during a…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
RTIs, especially total interruptions of >5 days, lead to accelerated tumor cell repopulation and radioresistance and poorer clinical outcomes, particularly for fast-growing carcinomas such as head and neck cancers.
“RTIs, especially total interruptions of >5 days, lead to accelerated tumor cell repopulation and radioresistance9 and poorer clinical outcomes,10, 11, 12, 13, 14 particularly for fast-growing carcinomas such as head and neck cancers.15”
From X-CART: a multimodal real-world data pipeline for explainable AI-driven patient navigation in radiation oncology (2026) · cites this paper as [9]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bese, N. S., Hendry, J., & Jeremic, B. (2007) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.03.010 · Cited by 382 · see citing works
Zink, J. A., Rashid, R., Chinthala, L., Kheirinejad, S., White, B. M., Kheirkhah Rahimabad, P., Hashtarkhani, S., Kumsa, F. A., Brett, C. L., Davis, R. L., et al. (2026) · ESMO Real World Data and Digital Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.esmorw.2026.100771 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Tarnawski, R., Fowler, J., Skladowski, K., Świerniak, A., Suwiński, R., Maciejewski, B., & Wygoda, A.
- Venue
- International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2002-09
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 229-236
- ISSN
- 0360-3016
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review