{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021181001283697046, 'fraction_numerical': 0.05648267008985879, 'mean_word_length': 5.019305019305019, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Iodine 125 source in interstitial tumor therapy. Clinical and biological considerations.

Our clinical experience with interstitial tumor therapy is presented in 2 groups of patients: 98 patients with metastatic carcinoma in neck lymph nodes implanted with iodine 125, iridium 192 or radon 222 encapsulated sources, and 105 patients with primary unresectable lung tumors, which were implanted either with radon 222 or iodine 125 seeds. The local tumor control rates with iodine 125, radon 222 and iridium 192 were 78 per cent (38/49), 65 per cent (15/23) and 58 per cent (7/12), while the local complication rates were 17 per cent, 35 per cent and 43 per cent, respectively. An analysis of the tumor control rate as a function of the implanted tumor dose shows that the iodine 125 implants with a delivery of the minimal effective tumor dose of 16,000 rads have a higher therapeutic effect than either radon 222 or iridium 192. The results of the patients with unresectable lung tumors similarly show that the implants with iodine 125 sources are superior to those with radon 222. The advantages could stem from the better spatial dose distribution, and from radiobiologic considerations associated with low dose rates, continous irradiation, and possibly gains in RBE. There present clinical data clearly demonstrate that iodine 125 seeds have a higher therapeutic ratio than radon 222 seeds. There are, in addition, distinct physical advantages making iodine 125 an attractive substitute for radon 222 for the interstitial implantation of malignant tumors.