Estimating Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Direct Power Consumption of Linear Accelerator–Based External Beam Radiation Therapy

Shenker, R.F.; Johnson, T.L.; Ribeiro, Márcio Garcia; Rodrigues, Anna; Chino, Junzo

doi:10.1016/j.adro.2022.101170

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The median total energy utilised per treatment was similar for HF and SBRT (median [range] 1. 4 3 [11.3-12.9] km / 7.0 [7][8] miles; P < 0.01). Figure 1 demonstrates real-world correlates of energy savings between SBRT vs HF when treating 300 patients with prostate cancer, an estimated annual volume at an average radiation centre.…”

Section: Energy Use In Moderate Hypofractionation and Stereotactic Bo...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We demonstrated SBRT leads to a significant reduction (82%) in energy expenditure. Shenker et al [8] [8]. Additionally, they evaluated energy expenditure of a TrueBeam Linac in idle periods [8].…”

Section: Fundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shenker et al [8] [8]. Additionally, they evaluated energy expenditure of a TrueBeam Linac in idle periods [8]. They discovered that in standby mode, LINAC TrueBeams use 64.8 kWh/day [8].…”

Section: Fundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[8] evaluated energy expenditure and CO 2 emissions among various cancer types in 90 patients. They reported that prostate SBRT had the lowest carbon emission per course (median [interquartile range] 2.18 [1.92–2.30] kgCO 2 ) compared to conventional treatment for prostate cancer (median [interquartile range] 17.34 [10.26–23.79] kg CO 2 ) [8]. Additionally, they evaluated energy expenditure of a TrueBeam Linac in idle periods [8].…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They reported that prostate SBRT had the lowest carbon emission per course (median [interquartile range] 2.18 [1.92–2.30] kgCO 2 ) compared to conventional treatment for prostate cancer (median [interquartile range] 17.34 [10.26–23.79] kg CO 2 ) [8]. Additionally, they evaluated energy expenditure of a TrueBeam Linac in idle periods [8]. They discovered that in standby mode, LINAC TrueBeams use 64.8 kWh/day [8].…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Energy use in moderate hypofractionation and stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Energy Use In Moderate Hypofractionation and Stereotactic Bo...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shenker et al [8] [8]. Additionally, they evaluated energy expenditure of a TrueBeam Linac in idle periods [8]. They discovered that in standby mode, LINAC TrueBeams use 64.8 kWh/day [8].…”

Section: Fundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Energy use in moderate hypofractionation and stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainability in radiation oncology: opportunities for enhancing patient care and reducing CO2 emissions in breast cancer radiotherapy at selected German centers

Bedir,

Grohmann,

Schäfer

et al. 2024

Strahlenther Onkol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objective Radiotherapy often entails a substantial travel burden for patients accessing radiation oncology centers. The total travel distance for such treatments is primarily influenced by two factors: fractionation schedules and the distances traveled. Specific data on these aspects are not well documented in Germany. This study aims to quantify the travel distances for routine breast cancer patients of five radiation oncology centers located in metropolitan, urban, and rural areas of Germany and to record the CO2 emissions resulting from travel. Methods We analyzed the geographic data of breast cancer patients attending their radiotherapy treatments and calculated travelling distances using Google Maps. Carbon dioxide emissions were estimated assuming a standard 40-miles-per-gallon petrol car emitting 0.168 kg of CO2 per kilometer. Result Addresses of 4198 breast cancer patients treated between 2018 and 2022 were analyzed. Our sample traveled an average of 37.2 km (minimum average: 14.2 km, maximum average: 58.3 km) for each radiation fraction. This yielded an estimated total of 6.2 kg of CO2 emissions per visit, resulting in 156.2 kg of CO2 emissions when assuming 25 visits (planning, treatment, and follow-up). Conclusion Our study highlights the environmental consequences associated with patient commutes for external-beam radiotherapy, indicating that reducing the number of treatment fractions can notably decrease CO2 emissions. Despite certain assumptions such as the mode of transport and possible inaccuracies in patient addresses, optimizing fractionation schedules not only reduces travel requirements but also achieves greater CO2 reductions while keeping improved patient outcomes as the main focus.

show abstract

Effect of Radiation Schedule on Transportation-Related Carbon Emissions: A Case Study in Rectal Cancer

Frick¹,

Baniel²,

Qu³

et al. 2023

Advances in Radiation Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estimating Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Direct Power Consumption of Linear Accelerator–Based External Beam Radiation Therapy

Cited by 10 publications

References 11 publications

Energy use in moderate hypofractionation and stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Energy use in moderate hypofractionation and stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Sustainability in radiation oncology: opportunities for enhancing patient care and reducing CO2 emissions in breast cancer radiotherapy at selected German centers

Effect of Radiation Schedule on Transportation-Related Carbon Emissions: A Case Study in Rectal Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About