Cargando…
Continuous controversy about radiation oncologists’ choice of treatment regimens for bone metastases: should we blame doctors, cancer-related features, or design of previous clinical studies?
Recent studies from Italy, Japan and Norway have confirmed previous reports, which found that a large variety of palliative radiotherapy regimens are used for painful bone metastases. Routine use of single fraction treatment might or might not be the preferred institutional approach. It is not entir...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3643865/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23574944 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-85 |
_version_ | 1782268386021998592 |
---|---|
author | Nieder, Carsten Pawinski, Adam Dalhaug, Astrid |
author_facet | Nieder, Carsten Pawinski, Adam Dalhaug, Astrid |
author_sort | Nieder, Carsten |
collection | PubMed |
description | Recent studies from Italy, Japan and Norway have confirmed previous reports, which found that a large variety of palliative radiotherapy regimens are used for painful bone metastases. Routine use of single fraction treatment might or might not be the preferred institutional approach. It is not entirely clear why inter-physician and inter-institution differences continue to persist despite numerous randomized trials, meta-analyses and guidelines, which recommend against more costly and inconvenient multi-fraction regimens delivering total doses of 30 Gy or more in a large number of clinical scenarios. In the present mini-review we discuss the questions of whether doctors are ignoring evidence-based medicine or whether we need additional studies targeting specifically those patient populations where recent surveys identified inconsistent treatment recommendations, e.g. because of challenging disease extent. We identify open questions and provide research suggestions, which might contribute to making radiation oncology practitioners more confident in selecting the right treatment for the right patient. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3643865 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-36438652013-05-04 Continuous controversy about radiation oncologists’ choice of treatment regimens for bone metastases: should we blame doctors, cancer-related features, or design of previous clinical studies? Nieder, Carsten Pawinski, Adam Dalhaug, Astrid Radiat Oncol Review Recent studies from Italy, Japan and Norway have confirmed previous reports, which found that a large variety of palliative radiotherapy regimens are used for painful bone metastases. Routine use of single fraction treatment might or might not be the preferred institutional approach. It is not entirely clear why inter-physician and inter-institution differences continue to persist despite numerous randomized trials, meta-analyses and guidelines, which recommend against more costly and inconvenient multi-fraction regimens delivering total doses of 30 Gy or more in a large number of clinical scenarios. In the present mini-review we discuss the questions of whether doctors are ignoring evidence-based medicine or whether we need additional studies targeting specifically those patient populations where recent surveys identified inconsistent treatment recommendations, e.g. because of challenging disease extent. We identify open questions and provide research suggestions, which might contribute to making radiation oncology practitioners more confident in selecting the right treatment for the right patient. BioMed Central 2013-04-10 /pmc/articles/PMC3643865/ /pubmed/23574944 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-85 Text en Copyright © 2013 Nieder et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Nieder, Carsten Pawinski, Adam Dalhaug, Astrid Continuous controversy about radiation oncologists’ choice of treatment regimens for bone metastases: should we blame doctors, cancer-related features, or design of previous clinical studies? |
title | Continuous controversy about radiation oncologists’ choice of treatment regimens for bone metastases: should we blame doctors, cancer-related features, or design of previous clinical studies? |
title_full | Continuous controversy about radiation oncologists’ choice of treatment regimens for bone metastases: should we blame doctors, cancer-related features, or design of previous clinical studies? |
title_fullStr | Continuous controversy about radiation oncologists’ choice of treatment regimens for bone metastases: should we blame doctors, cancer-related features, or design of previous clinical studies? |
title_full_unstemmed | Continuous controversy about radiation oncologists’ choice of treatment regimens for bone metastases: should we blame doctors, cancer-related features, or design of previous clinical studies? |
title_short | Continuous controversy about radiation oncologists’ choice of treatment regimens for bone metastases: should we blame doctors, cancer-related features, or design of previous clinical studies? |
title_sort | continuous controversy about radiation oncologists’ choice of treatment regimens for bone metastases: should we blame doctors, cancer-related features, or design of previous clinical studies? |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3643865/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23574944 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-85 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT niedercarsten continuouscontroversyaboutradiationoncologistschoiceoftreatmentregimensforbonemetastasesshouldweblamedoctorscancerrelatedfeaturesordesignofpreviousclinicalstudies AT pawinskiadam continuouscontroversyaboutradiationoncologistschoiceoftreatmentregimensforbonemetastasesshouldweblamedoctorscancerrelatedfeaturesordesignofpreviousclinicalstudies AT dalhaugastrid continuouscontroversyaboutradiationoncologistschoiceoftreatmentregimensforbonemetastasesshouldweblamedoctorscancerrelatedfeaturesordesignofpreviousclinicalstudies |