1
|
Chan TY, Tan PW, Tang JI. Proton therapy for early stage prostate cancer: is there a case? Onco Targets Ther 2016; 9:5577-86. [PMID: 27672328 PMCID: PMC5024773 DOI: 10.2147/ott.s108559] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Proton-beam therapy (PBT) for prostate cancer has been in used for several decades, with its technique evolving significantly over this period. A growing number of centers now routinely utilize pencil-beam scanning as an advanced technique of PBT. Interest and controversy concerning its use have recently come under scrutiny. While the past decade has produced an assemblage of evidence suggesting that PBT is safe and effective for early stage prostate cancer, it is still unknown whether the theoretical dosimetric advantages of PBT translate into meaningful clinical improvements over routine intensity-modulated radiation therapy, which is commonly used for these patients. Outcomes from early trials using whole courses of PBT have shown mixed results when compared with routine intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Therefore, randomized trials comparing these two techniques should be undertaken, as this would help in defining the role of PBT for this patient group. This article aims to describe the basics of PBT, review the reasons for the growing interest in PBT, review the evidence for PBT, review the controversy surrounding PBT, and inquire about PBT's future in the treatment of prostate cancer, with attention to its physical properties, comparative clinical and cost-effectiveness, and advances in its delivery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tabitha Y Chan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore
| | - Poh Wee Tan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore
| | - Johann I Tang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Basto M, Cooperberg MR, Murphy DG. Proton therapy websites: information anarchy creates confusion. BJU Int 2015; 115:183-5. [PMID: 25756133 DOI: 10.1111/bju.12667] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|
3
|
Jácome-Pita F, Sánchez-Salas R, Barret E, Amaruch N, Gonzalez-Enguita C, Cathelineau X. Focal therapy in prostate cancer: the current situation. Ecancermedicalscience 2014; 8:435. [PMID: 24944577 PMCID: PMC4049329 DOI: 10.3332/ecancer.2014.435] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2014] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Prostate cancer is one of the most significant pathologies in the field of urology. The adoption of screening strategies and improvements in biopsies have resulted in an increase in early-stage tumour detection. Radical global therapies provide very good oncological results in localised prostate cancer. However, excess treatment in low- and, in some cases, intermediate-risk groups affects the quality of life of these patients. In the case of localised prostate cancer, focal therapies offer a minimally invasive option with good results with respect to established treatments. Although this is currently not a standard treatment, it represents the therapeutic approach with the greatest potential. This literature review has the following objectives: to define selection criteria for patients who are candidates for focal therapy, to assess the current situation and results of the different therapeutic options, and to define procedures in cases of recurrence and for follow-ups. We concluded that focal therapy is a viable therapeutic alternative for localised prostate cancer, specifically cryosurgery and high-intensity targeted ultrasound, which have acceptable oncologic results and a lower comorbidity compared with global treatments. Studies with a high level of scientific evidence are still needed to validate these results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fx Jácome-Pita
- Urology Department, Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid 28040, Spain
| | - R Sánchez-Salas
- Urology Department, Institut Montsouris, Paris 75014, France
| | - E Barret
- Urology Department, Institut Montsouris, Paris 75014, France
| | - N Amaruch
- Urology Department, Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid 28040, Spain
| | | | - X Cathelineau
- Urology Department, Institut Montsouris, Paris 75014, France
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Abstract
Radiotherapy is a primary mode of treatment of many of the disease entities seen by the neurologist. Therefore knowledge of how ionizing radiation works and when it is indicated is a crucial part of the field of Neurology. The neurologist may also be confronted with some of the side effects and complications or radiotherapy treatment. This chapter attempts to serve as a review of the current day process of radiotherapy, a brief review of biology and physics of radiation, and how it is used in the treatment diseases which are common to the Neurologist. In addition we review the more commonly seen side effects and complications of treatment which may be seen by the neurologist.
Collapse
|
5
|
Orth M, Lauber K, Niyazi M, Friedl AA, Li M, Maihöfer C, Schüttrumpf L, Ernst A, Niemöller OM, Belka C. Current concepts in clinical radiation oncology. RADIATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL BIOPHYSICS 2014; 53:1-29. [PMID: 24141602 PMCID: PMC3935099 DOI: 10.1007/s00411-013-0497-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 116] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2013] [Accepted: 10/05/2013] [Indexed: 05/04/2023]
Abstract
Based on its potent capacity to induce tumor cell death and to abrogate clonogenic survival, radiotherapy is a key part of multimodal cancer treatment approaches. Numerous clinical trials have documented the clear correlation between improved local control and increased overall survival. However, despite all progress, the efficacy of radiation-based treatment approaches is still limited by different technological, biological, and clinical constraints. In principle, the following major issues can be distinguished: (1) The intrinsic radiation resistance of several tumors is higher than that of the surrounding normal tissue, (2) the true patho-anatomical borders of tumors or areas at risk are not perfectly identifiable, (3) the treatment volume cannot be adjusted properly during a given treatment series, and (4) the individual heterogeneity in terms of tumor and normal tissue responses toward irradiation is immense. At present, research efforts in radiation oncology follow three major tracks, in order to address these limitations: (1) implementation of molecularly targeted agents and 'omics'-based screening and stratification procedures, (2) improvement of treatment planning, imaging, and accuracy of dose application, and (3) clinical implementation of other types of radiation, including protons and heavy ions. Several of these strategies have already revealed promising improvements with regard to clinical outcome. Nevertheless, many open questions remain with individualization of treatment approaches being a key problem. In the present review, the current status of radiation-based cancer treatment with particular focus on novel aspects and developments that will influence the field of radiation oncology in the near future is summarized and discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Orth
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Kirsten Lauber
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Anna A. Friedl
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Minglun Li
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Cornelius Maihöfer
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Lars Schüttrumpf
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Anne Ernst
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Olivier M. Niemöller
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
- Present Address: Clinic for Radiation Oncology, St. Elisabeth Hospital Ravensburg, Ravensburg, Germany
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Lee DS, Seong J. Radiotherapeutic options for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis. Liver Cancer 2014; 3:18-30. [PMID: 24804174 PMCID: PMC3995383 DOI: 10.1159/000343855] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) is a common paraneoplastic condition in advanced primary hepatocellular carcinoma or hepatobiliary tract malignancies. Tumors with PVTT are frequently associated with adverse and aggressive features such as intrahepatic tumor dissemination, early treatment failure, or deterioration of hepatic function. Therefore, the treatment outcomes for PVTT in historical series are often dismal and discouraging. More recently, beneficial effects and excellent outcomes of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for treating this disease have been reported, and the use of EBRT is becoming more common because of the non-invasive nature of RT and rapid advances in RT technology. We hope to be able to cure this devastating condition in the near future with more advanced and efficacious disease management strategies. The current status and clinical trial results for EBRT as a promising treatment option for managing PVTT will be discussed here.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jinsil Seong
- *Jinsil Seong, MD, PhD, Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 250 Seongsanno, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752 (Republic of Korea), Tel. +82 2 2228 8111, E-mail
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Boonsirikamchai P, Choi S, Frank SJ, Ma J, Elsayes KM, Kaur H, Choi H. MR Imaging of Prostate Cancer in Radiation Oncology: What Radiologists Need to Know. Radiographics 2013; 33:741-61. [DOI: 10.1148/rg.333125041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
|
8
|
Rosenberg L, Tepper J. Present and future innovations in radiation oncology. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2013; 22:599-618. [PMID: 23622082 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2013.02.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to provide a review of innovations in radiation oncology that have been recently adopted as well as those that are likely to be adopted in the near future. Physics and engineering innovations, including image-guidance technologies and charged particle therapy, are discussed. Biologic innovations, including novel radiation sensitizers, functional imaging for use in treatment planning, and altered fractionation, are also discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lewis Rosenberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Chen FZ, Zhao XK. Prostate cancer: current treatment and prevention strategies. IRANIAN RED CRESCENT MEDICAL JOURNAL 2013; 15:279-84. [PMID: 24082997 PMCID: PMC3785898 DOI: 10.5812/ircmj.6499] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2012] [Accepted: 01/22/2013] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Abstract Prostate cancer is one of the life threatening disorders of male. Although, over the last two decades, a high rate of overdiagnosis, and overtreatment has lowered the incidence rate of prostate cancer, the treatment or prevention strategies are not enough to control the high rate of disease related mortality. Current medical treatment approaches include surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, cryosurgery and other methods. These approaches are more or less effective either as monotherapy or in multimodal approach. However, many adverse or side effects exist with these strategies. Researches are ongoing to find out the way or better strategies to eliminate the adverse effects. Dietary modifications may also contribute to decrease prostate cancer risk. Several nutraceuticals against prostate cancer have also been identified. This review article summarizes some of the current treatment, and prevention strategies with the protection of prostate cancer, which may be helpful to control and prevent this highly frequent life threatening disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fang-zhi Chen
- Department of Urology, the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China
| | - Xiao-kun Zhao
- Department of Urology, the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China
- Corresponding author: Xiao-kun Zhao, Department of Urology, the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China; Tel: +86-731-85295833; Fax: +86-73185295833, E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Bozzini G, Colin P, Nevoux P, Villers A, Mordon S, Betrouni N. Focal therapy of prostate cancer: energies and procedures. Urol Oncol 2013; 31:155-67. [DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2012.05.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2012] [Revised: 05/29/2012] [Accepted: 05/31/2012] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
|
11
|
Yu JB, Soulos PR, Herrin J, Cramer LD, Potosky AL, Roberts KB, Gross CP. Proton versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: patterns of care and early toxicity. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012; 105:25-32. [PMID: 23243199 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djs463] [Citation(s) in RCA: 120] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Proton radiotherapy (PRT) is an emerging treatment for prostate cancer despite limited knowledge of clinical benefit or potential harms compared with other types of radiotherapy. We therefore compared patterns of PRT use, cost, and early toxicity among Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer with those of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). METHODS We performed a retrospective study of all Medicare beneficiaries aged greater than or equal to 66 years who received PRT or IMRT for prostate cancer during 2008 and/or 2009. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with receipt of PRT. To assess toxicity, each PRT patient was matched with two IMRT patients with similar clinical and sociodemographic characteristics. The main outcome measures were receipt of PRT or IMRT, Medicare reimbursement for each treatment, and early genitourinary, gastrointestinal, and other toxicity. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS We identified 27,647 men; 553 (2%) received PRT and 27,094 (98%) received IMRT. Patients receiving PRT were younger, healthier, and from more affluent areas than patients receiving IMRT. Median Medicare reimbursement was $32,428 for PRT and $18,575 for IMRT. Although PRT was associated with a statistically significant reduction in genitourinary toxicity at 6 months compared with IMRT (5.9% vs 9.5%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.38 to 0.96, P = .03), at 12 months post-treatment there was no difference in genitourinary toxicity (18.8% vs 17.5%; OR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.76 to 1.54, P = .66). There was no statistically significant difference in gastrointestinal or other toxicity at 6 months or 12 months post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS Although PRT is substantially more costly than IMRT, there was no difference in toxicity in a comprehensive cohort of Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer at 12 months post-treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James B Yu
- Yale University School of Medicine, Department of Therapeutic Radiology, 40 Park St, New Haven, CT 06511, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Baicker K, Chandra A, Skinner JS. Saving Money or Just Saving Lives? Improving the Productivity of US Health Care Spending. ANNUAL REVIEW OF ECONOMICS 2012; 4:33-56. [PMID: 35722443 PMCID: PMC9203012 DOI: 10.1146/annurev-economics-080511-110942] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
There is growing concern over the rising share of the US economy devoted to health care spending. Fueled in part by demographic transitions, unchecked increases in entitlement spending will necessitate some combination of substantial tax increases, elimination of other public spending, or unsustainable public debt. This massive increase in health spending might be warranted if each dollar devoted to the health care sector yielded real health benefits, but this does not seem to be the case. Although we have seen remarkable gains in life expectancy and functioning over the past several decades, there is substantial variation in the health benefits associated with different types of spending. Some treatments, such as aspirin, beta blockers, and flu shots, produce a large health benefit per dollar spent. Other more expensive treatments, such as stents for cardiovascular disease, are high value for some patients but poor value for others. Finally, a large and expanding set of treatments, such as proton-beam therapy or robotic surgery, contributes to rapid increases in spending despite questionable health benefits. Moving resources toward more productive uses requires encouraging providers to deliver and patients to consume high-value care, a daunting task in the current political landscape. But widespread inefficiency also offers hope: Given the current distribution of resources in the US health care system, there is tremendous potential to improve the productivity of health care spending and the fiscal health of the United States.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katherine Baicker
- Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts 02115
- National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
| | - Amitabh Chandra
- Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
- National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
| | - Jonathan S Skinner
- Department of Economics, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755
- National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
| |
Collapse
|