Converting Gray's to mrem: A Primer

  • Context: Medical 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Xnn
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the conversion of Gray's (Gy) to millirem (mrem) in the context of radiation therapy, specifically for breast cancer treatment using TomoTherapy. Participants explore the implications of radiation dosage, including the effects of tissue weighting factors and the potential risks associated with radiation exposure.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about converting Gy to mrem, providing initial calculations based on the treatment plan and expressing concern over the radiation exposure.
  • Another participant explains the relationship between Gy, rad, and rem, noting the importance of the tissue weighting factor, which varies by tissue type.
  • Further clarification is provided regarding the specific weighting factors for skin and breast tissue, leading to revised calculations of radiation exposure per session.
  • A participant corrects an earlier claim about the type of radiation used in TomoTherapy, stating that it treats with photons rather than electrons, though this does not affect the weighting factor.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of weighing the benefits and risks of radiation treatment rather than focusing solely on dosage calculations.
  • Another participant shares statistics regarding survival rates and potential side effects of radiation therapy, including concerns about heart damage from stray radiation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints regarding the conversion of radiation units and the implications of radiation exposure. There is no consensus on the exact calculations or the significance of the findings, as some participants highlight different aspects of the treatment and its risks.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on specific tissue weighting factors and the unresolved nature of the impact of stray radiation on heart health. The discussion also reflects varying interpretations of the data and its implications for treatment decisions.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals seeking to understand radiation dosage in medical treatments, particularly in oncology, as well as those interested in the implications of radiation exposure and treatment planning.

Xnn
Messages
554
Reaction score
0
Does anybody know how to convert Gray's to mrem?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TomoTherapy

My wife is thinking of undergoing a treatment using the above machine.
The "Plan" is a total of 38.5 Gy in 10 sessions over 5 days.

A Gy is about 115 Rad.
Since this machine uses electrons, the weighting factor is 1.
So, 38.5*115 = 4,400 Rad = 4,400 Rem.
or 440 Rem per session (440,000 mRem/session).

For anybody knowledgeable of radiation, this is a lot of exposure.

Am I making an error?

Unfortunately, the people at the University Hospital (a Professor)
don't seem able to readily convert from Gy to Rem.
Medical Doctors can be scarey.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Hi Xnn! :smile:

The gray (Gy) measures absorbed radiation per mass.

1 rad is the old cgs unit, equal to 0.01 Gy … see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_(unit)"

1 sievert (Sv) = w gray, where the weighting factor w is 1 for electrons, so in this case 1 Sv = 1 Gy … see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sievert"

But there is also a weighting factor for tissue type, ranging from 0.01 to 0.2.

100 rem = 1 Sv … see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roentgen_equivalent_man"

So 38.5 Gy = 38.5 Sv = 3850 rem, but I don't know whether you have to reduce that by multiplying by the tissue type weighting factor.

(Compare dose examples at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sievert#Dose_examples")

I hope your wife's treatment is successful. :smile:​
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks tiny-tim;

I was missing the tissue weighing factor...

It's a treatment for Breast Cancer, so that would include
both skin and breast tissue.

Weighing factors according to Wikipedia:

skin 0.01
breast 0.05

However, Wikipedia also claims 1 Gy = 115Rad

So, skin dose would be 4.4 Rem per session (44 Rem total) and
breast tissue dose would be 22 Rem per session (220 Rem total)

This exceeds the 10CFR Part 20 occupational dose dose limit of 50 Rem annually to the organ, but not the skin. Of course, for medical purposes there are no limits that I'm aware of but at least it's in the ball park.

The Doctor did tell me that dosing the heart is more of a concern than the breast since it can cause heart damage. However, in 10CFR Part 20 land, there is no such distinction.

No weighing factors for heart, but it's 0.12 for lung and bone marrow.
 
Xnn said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TomoTherapy

Since this machine uses electrons, the weighting factor is 1.

TomoTherapy units all treat with photons, not electrons. Doesn't change the weighting factor though.
 
Hi Xnn! :smile:

As a physicist, I applaud your attempt to understand the physics involved.

But I don't see how it affects the decision whether to have the treatment.

Every radiation treatment has side-effects …

the question is whether the possible benefits outweigh the possible damage.

A more appropriate question to ask, or to research on the internet (and I'm sorry if this is upsetting, but perhaps it's better that you should ask this, rather than your wife), is: what are the survival rates for similar treatment (both here and at alternative hospitals)?
 
my bad; it's the Novac7 that uses electrons.

Anyhow, the average survival rate for breast cancer patients with a similar diagnosis as my wife are excellent (Invasive Ductal Carcinoma Stage 1, Grade 2 ER/PR positive, clear margins without lymph node involvement). Radiation is considered standard treatment after breast conserving surgery as it lowers the 10 year risk of local recurrence from between 20-30% down to between 5-10%; so the decision has pretty much been made.

Oncotype DX Genomic testing has shown the average rate of distance recurrence for my wife is 9% (95% CL: 6% -11%) with 5 years of tamoxifen.http://www.breastcancer.org/treatment/radiation/new_research/20070809b.jsp

For women treated between 1977 to 1995, at an average of 12 years after radiation therapy, 59% with left-sided breast cancer had stress test abnormalities compared to only 8% of women with right-sided breast cancer.
This is primarily due to stray radiation to the heart. Image-guided radiation therapy is relatively new. So, it's hard to say what the risk of heart damage may be. However, since this is also a risk of some chemo therapy treatments, then it may become a concern if there is ever a relapse.Although not the same as my wife, this article shows the positive benefits of radiation therapy: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3309196

Among the 43 patients treated with CA who actually received radiotherapy, there was only one local failure, compared with 12 local failures among the 59 patients (20%) who actually did not receive radiotherapy (P = .007).