CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
Become a fan on  Facebook  Add us on  Google Plus Follow us on  Twitter Join us on LinkedIn Sign up for our Newsletters Subscribe to our RSS Feed

 

CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
NURSES
PATIENTS
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

ONCOLOGY. Vol. 23 No. 3
Pages: 1  2  3  4  5  
Previous
NCI WORKSHOP 

Current Status and Future Potential of Advanced Technologies in Radiation Oncology

Part 1. Challenges and Resources

By BHADRASAIN VIKRAM, MD
Chief
Clinical Radiation Oncology Branch

 

C. NORMAN COLEMAN, MD
Associate Director
Radiation Research Program

 

JAMES A. DEYE, PhD
Program Director
Medical Physics
Radiation Research Program
Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis
National Cancer Institute
Rockville, Maryland
| March 16, 2009

Financial Disclosure: The authors have no significant financial interest or other relationship with the manufacturers of any products or providers of any service mentioned in this article.

Disclaimer: The opinions and conclusions in this report are those of the individual authors and participants and do not reflect an opinion or policy of the National Cancer Institute or the US Government.


The goal of the NIH-supported Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is to enhance and standardize the assessment of patient-reported healthrelated quality of life (HRQOL). Started in 2004, the PROMIS Network has utilized a sophisticated and rigorous multimethod approach to develop item banks measuring physical function, pain, fatigue, depression, anxiety, anger, and social well-being. Researchers can access PROMIS item banks through the PROMIS website (www.NIHpromis.org) to select either static or individually tailored adaptive measures of HRQOL. Either approach yields brief, precise, and valid measures of a patient’s health status.

In a special supplement funded by the NCI, the PROMIS network has extended the item banks to capture data on sexual functioning, cognitive function, sleep/wake function, and illness impact in cancer populations. This supplemental project will evaluate how well the PROMIS item banks perform, both in the treatment and the survivorship phases of care.

Why Clinical Trials Are Needed

Hypotheses regarding improved patient outcomes that are based on physical dose distributions and computer-generated treatment plans require appropriate clinical studies to validate those hypotheses. Admittedly very limited proof of principle currently exists, but the absence of proof is not proof of absence of benefit from the advanced technologies, because time is required for generating credible clinical trial data—both short- and long-term—on survival and patient-reported outcomes. Nonetheless, important and informative data on acute toxicities can be gathered fairly quickly.

Quality assurance procedures that can meet the demands of the advanced technologies must be established and implemented in conjunction with undertaking formal comparative studies. For instance, atlases for delineating target volumes and organs at risk, as well as common tools for standardization of image registration (fusion) software, have been developed as already described. Methods for dealing with the deformation of the target volumes and organs at risk, procedures for preventing errors in treatment delivery due to movement during and between fractions of radiation, and procedures for ensuring calculation of the correct dose in the presence of tissue heterogeneity must be standardized.

The advanced technologies offer exciting and potentially substantial advantages in radiation dose distributions, but given the current state of our knowledge, it can not be simply assumed that they help patients live longer or better. In fact, due to the reasons outlined above, we cannot even assume that the outcomes are as good as what is seen with “conventional” techniques in many cases! The possibilities of geographic miss, underdosage, or overdosage are real, even before taking into account the uncertainties in target delineation, deformation, motion, and heterogeneities.[ 3-8] Researchers should take into account the differential costs of replanning to account for tumor regression during treatment when calculating quality-adjusted life-years and cost-effectiveness.

Furthermore, two recent articles offer poignant reminders of how often the perception of academic clinicians that a new, experimental cancer treatment shall produce an outcome better than the standard treatment is proven wrong by prospective randomized trials.[10,11]

In part 2 of this article, which will appear in the next issue of ONCOLOGY, the authors describe the state of the science for various disease sites, with considerations of tumor control and toxicity rates after traditional conformal radiation therapy, and whether phase III trials support an additional benefit from the advanced technologies.

Pages: 1  2  3  4  5  
Previous
 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.





1. Kry SF, Salehpour M, Followill DS, et al: The calculated risk of fatal secondary malignancies from intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 62:1195- 1203, 2005
2. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ: Secondary neutrons in clinical proton radiotherapy: A charged issue. Radiother Oncol 86:165-170, 2008.
3. Das IJ, Cheng CW, Chopra KL, et al: Intensity-modulated radiation therapy dose prescription, recording, and delivery: Patterns of variability among institutions and treatment planning systems. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:300- 307, 2008.
4. Ibbott GS, Molineu A, Followill DS: Independent evaluations of IMRT through the use of an anthropomorphic phantom. Technol Cancer Res Treat 5:481-487, 2006.
5. Cooper JS, Mukherji SK, Toledano AY, et al: An evaluation of the variability of tumorshape definition derived by experienced observers from CT images of supraglottic carcinomas (ACRIN protocol 6658). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 67:972-975, 2007.
6. Li XA, Arthur DW, Bucholz TA, et al: Variability of target and normal structure delineation for breast-cancer radiotherapy: A RTOG multi-institutional and multi-observer study (abstract 127). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 69(3 suppl 1):S72, 2006.
7. Lawton CA, Michalski J, El-Naqa I, et al: Variation in the definition of clinical target volumes for pelvic node conformal radiation therapy of prostate cancer (abstract 2224). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 69(3 suppl 1): S327, 2006.
8. Davidson SE, Ibbott GS, Prado KL, et al: Accuracy of two heterogeneity dose calculation algorithms for IMRT in treatment plans designed using an anthropomorphic thorax phantom. Med Phys 34:1850-1857, 2007.
9. Followill DS, Evans DR, Cherry C, et al: Design, development, and implementation of the radiological physics center’s pelvis and thorax anthropomorphic quality assurance phantoms. Med Phys 34:2070-2076, 2007.
10. Soares HP, Kumar A, Daniels S, et al: Evaluation of new treatments in radiation oncology: Are they better than standard treatments? JAMA 293:970-978, 2005.
11. Kumar A, Soares H, Wells R, et al: Are experimental treatments for cancer in children superior to established treatments? Observational study of randomised controlled trials by the Children’s Oncology Group. BMJ 331:1295, 2005.
 
TOPIC INDEX

Cancer Types

 
  • Breast
  • Breast (HER2+)
  • Breast (Triple-Negative)
  • CML
  • Colorectal
  • Gastrointestinal
  • GIST
  • Genitourinary
  • Gynecologic
  • Head & Neck
  • Hematology
  • Kidney (Renal Cell)
  • Leukemia
  • Lung
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Ovarian
  • Prostate
  • Sarcoma

Supportive Care

More Topics

  • Bone Metastases
  • End-of-Life Care
  • Palliative Care
  • Ethics in Oncology
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy


All Topics 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma
  • Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Who Is Benefiting?
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • A 48-Year-Old Woman With Irregular Vaginal Bleeding
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • Cannabis Linked to Decreased Bladder Cancer Risk
  • Breast Cancer Screening, Risk, and Options for High-Risk Women
  • Rising PSA Level in a 46-Year-Old Man
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: An Update on Treatment
  • ASCO: Dabrafenib Shows Activity in BRAF-Mutated NSCLC Patients
  • Preventing Burnout in Oncology
  • ASCO: Yoga Reduces Insomnia in Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Hormone Therapy
  • Physical Activity Across the Cancer Continuum
  • Exercise After Cancer Diagnosis: Time to Get Moving
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
CME ACTIVITIES

Current Challenges in Metastatic Breast Cancer:

Patient Management and Treatment Strategies

Interactive Case Challenge Series

 

This series of case presentations (five individual cases) will provide oncologists and other healthcare professionals with strategies for evaluating evidence-based data on the latest treatments in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and the application of that data into the development of individualized approaches to care, including overcoming resistance, in order to optimize management and outcomes for patients.

 

Go to Activity

 
CONNECT WITH US
Become a fan on
Facebook
Add us on
Google Plus
Follow us on
Twitter
Join us on
LinkedIn
Sign up for our
Newsletters
Subscribe to our
RSS Feed
CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy