Japanese journal of clinical oncology · 2020
National survey of radiation oncologists' practice patterns regarding hormone-naïve prostate cancer with bone metastases.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nakamura Katsumasa, Ishikawa Hitoshi, Akimoto Tetsuo, Aoki Manabu, Kariya Shinji, Kawamura Hidemasa, Kumano Tomoyasu, Kozuka Takuyo, Konishi Kenta, Sakaguchi Masakuni, Takayama Kenji, Other authors are shown in Appendix
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To explore radiation oncologists' attitudes and practice patterns of radiotherapy for hormone-naïve prostate cancer with bone metastases in Japan.
METHODS: An internet-based survey was distributed to board-certified radiation oncologists of the Japanese Society of Radiation Oncology. Three hypothetical cases were assumed: hormone-naïve prostate cancer with single, three or multiple non-symptomatic bone metastases. The respondents described their attitude regarding such cases, treatment methods and the radiotherapy dose fractionation that they would recommend.
RESULTS: Among the 1013 board-certified radiation oncologists in Japan, 373 (36.8%) responded to the questionnaire. Most of the respondents (85.0%) believed that radiotherapy may be applicable as a primary treatment for hormone-naïve prostate cancer with bone metastases in some circumstances. For Case 1 (single bone metastasis), 55.0% of the respondents recommended radiotherapy for the prostate and bone metastasis. For Case 2 (three bone metastases), only 24.4% recommended radiotherapy for all lesions, and 31.4% recommended radiotherapy for the prostate only. For Case 3 (multiple bone metastases), 49.1% of the respondents stated that there was no indication for radiotherapy. However, 34% of the respondents still preferred to administer radiotherapy for the prostate. The radiotherapy techniques and dose fractionations varied widely among the respondents.
CONCLUSION: Most of the respondent radiation oncologists believed that radiotherapy may be beneficial for hormone-naïve prostate cancer with bone metastases.
METHODS: An internet-based survey was distributed to board-certified radiation oncologists of the Japanese Society of Radiation Oncology. Three hypothetical cases were assumed: hormone-naïve prostate cancer with single, three or multiple non-symptomatic bone metastases. The respondents described their attitude regarding such cases, treatment methods and the radiotherapy dose fractionation that they would recommend.
RESULTS: Among the 1013 board-certified radiation oncologists in Japan, 373 (36.8%) responded to the questionnaire. Most of the respondents (85.0%) believed that radiotherapy may be applicable as a primary treatment for hormone-naïve prostate cancer with bone metastases in some circumstances. For Case 1 (single bone metastasis), 55.0% of the respondents recommended radiotherapy for the prostate and bone metastasis. For Case 2 (three bone metastases), only 24.4% recommended radiotherapy for all lesions, and 31.4% recommended radiotherapy for the prostate only. For Case 3 (multiple bone metastases), 49.1% of the respondents stated that there was no indication for radiotherapy. However, 34% of the respondents still preferred to administer radiotherapy for the prostate. The radiotherapy techniques and dose fractionations varied widely among the respondents.
CONCLUSION: Most of the respondent radiation oncologists believed that radiotherapy may be beneficial for hormone-naïve prostate cancer with bone metastases.