Nanotechnology in radiation oncology.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wang AZ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4152716 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Nanotechnology in radiation oncology.
Wang Andrew Z AZ Tepper Joel E JE
Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 20140811 26
Nanotechnology, the manipulation of matter on atomic and molecular scales, is a relatively new branch of science. It has already made a significant impact on clinical medicine, especially in oncology. Nanomaterial has several characteristics that are ideal for oncology applications, including preferential accumulation in tumors, low distribution in normal tissues, biodistribution, pharmacokinetics, and clearance, that differ from those of small molecules. Because these properties are also well s ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Radiation therapy is a critical component in the curative management of many solid tumor types, and advances in radiation delivery techniques during the past decade have led to improved disease control and quality of life for patients. During the same period, remarkable advances have also been made in understanding the genomic landscape of tumors; however, treatment decisions in radiation oncology continue to depend primarily on clinical and histopathologic characteristics rather than on the genetic features of the tumor or the patient. With the development of novel genomic techniques and their increasing use in clinical practice, radiation oncology is uniquely positioned to leverage these advances to identify novel biomarkers that could inform radiation dose, field, and the use of concurrent systemic agents. Here, we summarize efforts to use genomic techniques to guide radiation decisions, and we highlight some of the current opportunities and challenges that exist in attempting to apply precision oncology principles in radiation oncology.
| S-EPMC7446508 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Leveraging Electronic Health Records (EHR) and Oncology Information Systems (OIS) has great potential to generate hypotheses for cancer treatment, since they directly provide medical data on a large scale. In order to gather a significant amount of patients with a high level of clinical details, multicenter studies are necessary. A challenge in creating high quality Big Data studies involving several treatment centers is the lack of semantic interoperability between data sources. We present the ontology we developed to address this issue.Radiation Oncology anatomical and target volumes were categorized in anatomical and treatment planning classes. International delineation guidelines specific to radiation oncology were used for lymph nodes areas and target volumes. Hierarchical classes were created to generate The Radiation Oncology Structures (ROS) Ontology. The ROS was then applied to the data from our institution.Four hundred and seventeen classes were created with a maximum of 14 children classes (average = 5). The ontology was then converted into a Web Ontology Language (.owl) format and made available online on Bioportal and GitHub under an Apache 2.0 License. We extracted all structures delineated in our department since the opening in 2001. 20,758 structures were exported from our "record-and-verify" system, demonstrating a significant heterogeneity within a single center. All structures were matched to the ROS ontology before integration into our clinical data warehouse (CDW).In this study we describe a new ontology, specific to radiation oncology, that reports all anatomical and treatment planning structures that can be delineated. This ontology will be used to integrate dosimetric data in the Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris CDW that stores data from 6.5 million patients (as of February 2017).
| S-EPMC5774757 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Advances in technology of the past decades led to development of new nanometer scale diagnosis and treatment approaches in cancer medicine leading to establishment of nanooncology. Inorganic and organic nanomaterials have been shown to improve bioimaging techniques and targeted drug delivery systems. Their favorable physico-chemical characteristics, like small sizes, large surface area compared to volume, specific structural characteristics, and possibility to attach different molecules on their surface transform them into excellent transport vehicles able to cross cell and/or tissue barriers, including the blood-brain barrier. The latter is one of the greatest challenges in diagnosis and treatment of brain cancers. Application of nanomaterials can prolong the circulation time of the drugs and contrasting agents in the brain, posing an excellent opportunity for advancing the treatment of the most aggressive form of the brain cancer-glioblastomas. However, possible unwanted side-effects and toxicity issues must be considered before final clinical translation of nanoparticles.
| S-EPMC6567262 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Radiotherapy has emerged as one of the first lines of treatment in oncology. The past few decades have seen dramatic changes in the delivery of radiation therapy, with dose fractionation and treatment planning being the major focuses of research. Although effective, such empirical approaches are hardly optimal, and instances of patient mortality and tumor relapse are not rare. In this Perspective, we review the emerging technologies for optimization of radiosensitization, hypoxia modulation, and combinatorial therapeutic regimes for improved treatment outcomes in preclinical tumor models, with a focus on nanotechnology-mediated approaches. Such an approach is expected to open more productive avenues in the advancement of radiation therapy compared to simply modulating the radiation dose delivered to the tumor.
| S-EPMC5552968 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite the promising efficacy of immunotherapy in some patients, many other patients are resistant. The synergistic effect of radiotherapy (RT) in combination with immunotherapy reported in case reports and clinical trials has piqued the interest of radiologists in investigating the underlying mechanisms and efficacy of the combination in preclinical and clinical trials. To date, the reported data are limited to small-sized samples, trials lacking a comparison arm, and trials using diverse immunotherapies, various radiation doses, and fractionations. There are just a few studies comparing the efficacy of immunotherapy and radiotherapy to that of conventional therapies or different combinations. Radiologists should design and conduct clinical trials wisely to confirm the efficacy of the combination, particularly the abscopal effect, identify the best combination of various immunotherapeutic drugs and different radiation models for patients, identify the best sequence of the combination, determine the optimal timing of the combination, select the target site and volume, lower adverse effects, and explore predictive models to identify patients who may benefit from the combination therapy. We expect that these clinical trials performed by radiologists will offer definitive evidence for the wide use of the combination of RT and immunotherapy in clinical practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This review will provide an update on the use of a combination of radiotherapy and immunotherapy, a cautious interpretation of preliminary results, and future directions for radiologists to perform well-designed clinical trials.
| S-EPMC6394774 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Radiation therapy (RT) is used to treat children with CNS tumors, solid tumors or Hodgkin lymphoma. Pediatric radiation oncologists have provided critical input into the development and implementation of concepts for clinical trials to further define the modality's role and test newer methods to reduce side effects or intensify therapy. The quality of pediatric oncology clinical trials that include radiation therapy is linked to the quality of guidelines. Radiation oncology is an adult medical specialty; thus, pediatric radiation oncologists are uniquely positioned to work with adult cancer investigators in the reorganized US National Cancer Institute Clinic Trials Network.
| S-EPMC4709221 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeScientific and clinical achievements in radiation, medical, and surgical oncology are changing the landscape of interdisciplinary oncology. The German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) working group of young clinicians and scientists (yDEGRO) and the DEGRO representation of associate and full professors (AKRO) are aware of the essential role of radiation oncology in multidisciplinary treatment approaches. Together, yDEGRO and AKRO endorsed developing a German radiotherapy & radiation oncology vision 2030 to address future challenges in patient care, research, and education. The vision 2030 aims to identify priorities and goals for the next decade in the field of radiation oncology.MethodsThe vision development comprised three phases. During the first phase, areas of interest, objectives, and the process of vision development were defined jointly by the yDEGRO, AKRO, and the DEGRO board. In the second phase, a one-day strategy retreat was held to develop AKRO and yDEGRO representatives' final vision from medicine, biology, and physics. The third phase was dedicated to vision interpretation and program development by yDEGRO representatives.ResultsThe strategy retreat's development process resulted in conception of the final vision "Innovative radiation oncology Together - Precise, Personalized, Human." The first term "Innovative radiation oncology" comprises the promotion of preclinical research and clinical trials and highlights the development of a national committee for strategic development in radiation oncology research. The term "together" underpins collaborations within radiation oncology departments as well as with other partners in the clinical and scientific setting. "Precise" mainly covers technological precision in radiotherapy as well as targeted oncologic therapeutics. "Personalized" emphasizes biology-directed individualization of radiation treatment. Finally, "Human" underlines the patient-centered approach and points towards the need for individual longer-term career curricula for clinicians and researchers in the field.ConclusionThe vision 2030 balances the ambition of physical, technological, and biological innovation as well as a comprehensive, patient-centered, and collaborative approach towards radiotherapy & radiation oncology in Germany.
| S-EPMC8604860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeResidency training environments can differ significantly; therefore, resident satisfaction may vary widely among programs. Here, we sought to examine several variables in program satisfaction through a survey of radiation oncology (RO) trainees in the United States.Methods and materialsAn anonymous, institutional review board-approved, internet-based survey was developed and distributed to U.S. residents in RO in September 2016. This email-based survey assessed program-specific factors with regard to workload, work-life balance, and education as well as resident-specific factors such as marital status and postgraduate year. Binomial multivariable regression assessed the correlations between these factors and the endpoint of resident-reported likelihood of selecting an alternative RO residency program if given the choice again.ResultsA total of 215 residents completed the required survey sections, representing 29.3% of U.S. RO residents. When asked whether residency allowed for an adequate balance between work and personal life, the majority of residents (75.6%) agreed or strongly agreed, but a minority (9.3%) did not feel that residency allowed for sufficient time for personal life. The majority of residents (69.7%) indicated that they would choose the same residency program again, but 12.2% would have made a different choice. Almost three-fourths of residents (73.0%) felt that faculty and staff cared about the educational success of residents, but 9.27% did not. Binomial multivariable regression revealed that senior residents (odds ratio: 6.70; 95% confidence interval, 2.20-22.4) were more likely to desire a different residency program. In contrast, residents who reported constructive feedback use by the residency program (odds ratio:0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.91) were more satisfied with their program choice.ConclusionsMost RO residents reported satisfaction with their choice of residency program, but seniors had higher rates of dissatisfaction. Possible interventions to improve professional satisfaction include incorporating constructive resident feedback to enhance the program. The potential impact of job market pressures on seniors should be further explored.
| S-EPMC6127972 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rapid advancements in radiotherapy and molecularly targeted therapies have resulted in the development of potential paradigm-shifting use of radiotherapy in the treatment of cancer. In this review, we discuss some of the most promising therapeutic approaches in the field of radiation oncology. These strategies include the use of highly targeted stereotactic radiotherapy and particle therapy as well as combining radiotherapy with agents that modulate the DNA damage response, augment the immune response, or protect normal tissues.
| S-EPMC4526434 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This paper reports the key findings of the Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2014 workforce census and compares the results with earlier surveys.The census was conducted in mid-2014 with distribution to all radiation oncologists, educational affiliates and trainees listed on the college database. There were six email reminders and responses were anonymous. The overall response rate was 76.1%.The age range of fellows was 32-96 (mean?=?49 years, median?=?47 years). The majority of the radiation oncologists were male (n?=?263, 63%). The minority of radiation oncologists were of Asian descent (n?=?43, 13.4%). Radiation oncologists graduated from medical school on average 23 years ago (median?=?22 years). A minority of fellows (n?=?66, 20%) held another postgraduate qualification. Most radiation oncologists worked, on average, at two practices (median?=?2, range 1-7). Practising radiation oncologists worked predominantly in the public sector (n?=?131, 49%), but many worked in both the public and private sectors (n?=?94, 37%), and a minority worked in the private sector only (n?=?38, 14%). The largest proportion of the workforce was from New South Wales accounting for 29% of radiation oncologists. Radiation oncologists worked an average of 43?h/week (median?=?43?h, range 6-80). Radiation oncologists who worked in the private sector worked less hours than their public sector or public/private sector colleagues. (38.3 vs. 42.9 vs. 44.3?h, P?=?0.042). Victorians worked the fewest average hours per week at 38?h and West Australians the most at 46?h/week. Radiation oncologists averaged 48?min for each new case, 17?min per follow up and 11?min for a treatment review. Radiation oncologists averaged 246 new patients per year (median?=?250, range?=?20-600) with men (average?=?268), Western Australians (average?=?354) and those in private practice seeing more (average?=?275). Most radiation oncologists considered themselves as specialists (n?=?151, 60%), but nearly all those from South Australia were generalists (n?=?15, 94%) as were three-quarters of those from private practice. A minority of radiation oncologist respondents (10%) intended to retire within 5 years with a further 16% within 10 years.There was a stabilisation of trainee numbers in Australia and New Zealand with no increase compared with 2010 (142 in 2014 vs. 143 in 2010). The most common age bracket for trainees remained 31-35 years. One-third of trainees were of Asian descent and nearly half held other degrees. The majority of trainees were satisfied with their career, but 30% were not entirely satisfied. Nearly half of trainee respondents would have reconsidered their choice of specialty had they known about the possible oversupply in the workforce with 12.4% undecided about continuing their career in radiation oncology. There were still 16% of trainees with no protected time during the working week, and a further 21% with only 1?h. Only one trainee respondent preferred to work in private practice, and job availability remained a concern for 89% of respondents.The radiation oncologist workforce numbers have increased at a much slower rate, and unemployment remained low. Many parameters remained similar to the 2010 survey. However, there has been a decrease in the average number of new patients seen per year, working hours and also a slight decrease in the time spent per new patient. The trainee numbers have stabilised, but job availability remained a concern. A significant proportion of trainees were not satisfied with their career.
| S-EPMC5061100 | biostudies-literature