Continous controversy about radiation oncologists' choice of treatment regimens for bone metatases: should we blame doctors, canser-related features, or design of previous clinical studies
Permanent lenke
https://hdl.handle.net/10037/6025Dato
2013Type
Journal articleTidsskriftartikkel
Peer reviewed
Sammendrag
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 interinstitution
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.
Forlag
BioMed CentralSitering
Radiation Oncology 8(2013) nr. 1 s. 85-Metadata
Vis full innførselSamlinger
Følgende lisensfil er knyttet til denne innførselen: