Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 14596505

Developments in radiotherapy.

Abstract

A systematic assessment of radiotherapy for cancer was conducted by The Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU) in 2001. The assessment included a review of future developments in radiotherapy and an estimate of the potential benefits of improved radiotherapy in Sweden. The conclusions reached from this review can be summarized as: Successively better knowledge is available on dose-response relationships for tumours and normal tissues at different fractionation schedules and treated volumes. Optimization of dose levels and fractionation schedules should improve the treatment outcome. Improved treatment results may be expected with even more optimized fractionation schedules. The radiosensitivity of the tumour is dependent on the availability of free oxygen in the cells. The oxygen effect has been studied for a long time and new knowledge has emerged, but there is still no consensus on the best way to minimize its negative effect in the treatment of hypoxic tumours. Development in imaging techniques is rapid, improving accuracy in outlining targets and organs at risk. This is a prerequisite for advanced treatment planning. More accurate treatment can be obtained using all the computer techniques that are successively made available for calculating dose distributions, controlling the accelerator and multileaf collimator (MLC) and checking patient set-up. Optimized treatment plans can be achieved using inverse dose planning and intensity modulation radiation therapy (IMRT). Optimization algorithms based on biological data from clinical trials could be a part of future dose planning. New genetic markers might be developed that give a measure of the radiation responsiveness of tumours and normal tissue. This could lead to more individualized treatments. New types of radiation sources may be expected: protons, light ions, and improved beams (and compounds) for boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT). Proton accelerators with scanned-beam systems and energy modulation give good dose distribution. The results reported with carbon ions from Japan and Germany are promising. An interesting development is to verify the dose and position for the irradiated volume with PET on line. Safer margins are obtained and the treatment volume can thus be limited. Very large accelerators are needed to accelerate the carbon ions. Still, it should be possible to keep the costs per patient at the same level as those for other types of advanced radiotherapy, since far fewer treatments per patient are needed. It might also be possible to treat new groups of patients. Increased resources are needed to introduce all the currently available techniques. New types of particle accelerators require large investments and a new structure of radiotherapy in Sweden.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Hans Svensson, Torgil R Möller, SBU Survey Group. 2003. Developments in radiotherapy.. https://doi.org/10.1080/02841860310011159

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Dose errors due to inhomogeneities in balloon catheter brachytherapy for breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate dose errors in balloon catheter brachytherapy of breast cancer due to inhomogeneities, such as iodine-containing radiographic contrast medium in the balloon, the lack of scattering medium, and the low density of lung that are not considered by commercial treatment planning systems (TPS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: By accounting for these inhomogeneities in breast/lung phantoms, Monte Carlo simulations were performed to calculate doses in the breast and lung. Doses were also calculated by a commercial TPS. The Monte Carlo doses and the TPS doses were compared along the transverse and longitudinal axes of the source. RESULTS: The Monte Carlo doses were lower by 4-10% on the prescription line than the TPS doses, depending on the concentration (5-25% by volume) of the contrast medium, and on the direction from the source. The lack of scattering medium around the breast contributes to the differences more than the attenuation by the contrast medium. Attenuation contributed approximately 1.0-4.8% at the concentrations investigated in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Current treatment planning systems, which assume a source in a large homogeneous water-equivalent medium, significantly overestimate doses in breast brachytherapy.

Brachytherapy↗

Does prior transurethral resection of prostate compromise brachytherapy quality: a dosimetric analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate, in a retrospective review, prostate brachytherapy dosimetry outcomes relative to the transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) cavity size to address the theoretical concern that an intraprostatic cavity may hinder adequate radioactive source placement. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 73 patients who underwent prostate brachytherapy as part of their treatment of localized prostate cancer had a history of a prior TURP. Of these 73 patients, 37 underwent (125)I implantation, 19 (103)Pd implantation, and 17 partial (103)Pd implantation. The dose was calculated using the dose to 90% of the prostate gland (D(90)) from the 1-month post-implant dosimetric analysis. The doses were normalized relative to 100% of the prescription dose. Archived transrectal ultrasound images were used to determine the maximal length and width of the visible residual TURP cavities. The prolate spheroid or symmetric egg shape was used to calculate each residual cavity volume. The derived volume of the TURP cavity was divided by the measured ultrasound volume of the prostate at brachytherapy, creating a percentage of volume measurement for each prostate. All p values, unless otherwise specified, were generated by comparing patients without a visible TURP defect with the subgroups of patients with a visible defect using the Student t test. RESULTS: A visible residual TURP defect was noted on the operative transrectal ultrasound images of 55 (75%) of the 73 patients with a history of TURP before brachytherapy. The 18 patients without a visible TURP defect had a median D(90) of 96% and were used for subsequent statistical comparison. Thirty-six patients with a TURP defect <10% of the entire prostate volume had a median D(90) of 109% (p = 0.02). Thirteen patients with a TURP defect between 10% and 20% of the prostate volume had a median D(90) of 112% (p = 0.03). Six patients with a TURP defect >20% of the prostate volume had a D(90) of 89% (p = 0.43). CONCLUSION: A visible residual TURP cavity that is assumed to have a prolate spheroid shape and occupy >/=10% of a prostate volume did not appear to be a statistically significant hindrance to proper dosimetric outcome.

Brachytherapy↗