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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nieder, Carsten, Pawinski, Adam, Dalhaug, Astrid
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