Expert consensus on re-irradiation for recurrent glioma.
Expert consensus on re-irradiation for recurrent glioma.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s13014-017-0928-3
复制
发表时间：
2017-12-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Camphausen K
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Krauze AV;Attia A;Braunstein S;Chan M;Combs SE;Fietkau R;Fiveash J;Flickinger J;Grosu A;Howard S;Nieder C;Niyazi M;Rowe L;Smart DD;Tsien C;Camphausen K
探讨放射肿瘤学家对再次放射治疗(Re-RT)作为复发性脑胶质瘤治疗选择的重要考虑因素的看法。对13名参与护理中枢神经系统肿瘤患者的放射肿瘤学家进行了调查。调查由49个问题组成，分为两个领域：人口统计部分(10个问题)和病例部分(5个复治病例，其中5至6个问题代表临床上可能遇到的一个或多个复治治疗难题)。受访者被要求对提供Re-RT的各种因素的相关性进行评级，以决定提供Re-RT与不提供Re-RT的决定、要治疗的量、要使用的边际、建议的剂量/分次以及关于每种情况下的理由的任何额外评论。69%的应答者执业时间超过10年，到目前为止，61%的应答者重新放射治疗20至100名患者，54%的应答者每月看到2-5例再次放射治疗，每月撤退1-2名患者。大多数应答者(分别为85%、92%、77%和69%)认为复发肿瘤量、自上次放射治疗以来的时间、以前对危险器官的剂量和患者的表现状况与提供重新放射治疗作为一种选择非常相关或非常相关。专家们的Re-RT实践仍然是异质性的，反映了可用于决策的高质量预期数据的匮乏。然而，执业放射肿瘤学家可以通过参考本调查中发现的适合重新放射治疗的病例来支持自己的决定。本文的在线版本(10.1186/s13014-0170928-3)包含补充材料，可供授权用户使用。
To investigate radiation oncologists’ opinions on important considerations to offering re-irradiation (re-RT) as a treatment option for recurrent glioma. A survey was conducted with 13 radiation oncologists involved in the care of central nervous system tumor patients. The survey was comprised of 49 questions divided into 2 domains: a demographic section (10 questions) and a case section (5 re-RT cases with 5 to 6 questions representing one or several re-RT treatment dilemmas as may be encountered in the clinic). Respondents were asked to rate the relevance of various factors to offering re-RT, respond to the cases with a decision to offer re-RT vs. not, volume to be treated, margins to be employed, dose/fractionation suggested and any additional comments with respect to rationale in each scenario. Sixty nine percent of responders have been practicing for greater than 10 years and 61% have re-RT 20 to 100 patients to date, with 54% seeing 2–5 re-RT cases per month and retreating 1–2 patients per month. Recurrent tumor volume, time since previous radiation therapy, previously administered dose to organs at risk and patient performance status were rated by the majority of responders (85%, 92%, 77%, and 69% respectively) as extremely relevant or very relevant to offering re-RT as an option. The experts’ practice of re-RT is still heterogeneous, reflecting the paucity of high-quality prospective data available for decision-making. Nevertheless, practicing radiation oncologists can support own decisions by referring to the cases found suitable for re-RT in this survey. The online version of this article (10.1186/s13014-017-0928-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.09.002
发表时间：
2012-01-01
影响因子：
7
作者：
Niyazi, Maximilian;Ganswindt, Ute;Belka, Claus
通讯作者：
Belka, Claus
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
Mueller, Klaus;Henke, Guido;Baumert, Brigitta G.
通讯作者：
Baumert, Brigitta G.
影响因子：
3.1
作者：
Combs, Stephanie E.;Edler, Lutz;Debus, Juergen
通讯作者：
Debus, Juergen
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.05.031
发表时间：
2013-03-01
影响因子：
7
作者：
Shapiro, Lauren Q.;Beal, Kathryn;Gutin, Philip H.
通讯作者：
Gutin, Philip H.
DOI：
10.1016/s0360-3016(96)00455-5
发表时间：
1997-01-15
影响因子：
7
作者：
Shepherd, SF;Laing, RW;Brada, M
通讯作者：
Brada, M