Proton Beam Therapy for Cancer in Children and Adults: A Health Technology Assessment.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ontario Health (Quality)
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8130814 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeProton beam therapy (PBT) is a promising modality for the management of thoracic malignancies. We report our preliminary experience of treating esophageal cancer patients with concurrent chemotherapy (CChT) and PBT (CChT/PBT) at MD Anderson Cancer Center.Methods and materialsThis is an analysis of 62 esophageal cancer patients enrolled on a prospective study evaluating normal tissue toxicity from CChT/PBT from 2006 to 2010. Patients were treated with passive scattering PBT with two- or three-field beam arrangement using 180 to 250 MV protons. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to assess time-to-event outcomes and compared the distributions between groups using the log-rank test.ResultsThe median follow-up time was 20.1 months for survivors. The median age was 68 years (range, 38-86). Most patients were males (82%) who had adenocarcinomas (76%) and Stage II-III disease (84%). The median radiation dose was 50.4 Gy (RBE [relative biologic equivalence]) (range, 36-57.6). The most common grade 2 to 3 acute toxicities from CChT/PBT were esophagitis (46.8%), fatigue (43.6%), nausea (33.9%), anorexia (30.1%), and radiation dermatitis (16.1%). There were two cases of grade 2 and 3 radiation pneumonitis and two cases of grade 5 toxicities. A total of 29 patients (46.8%) received preoperative CChT/PBT, with one postoperative death. The pathologic complete response (pCR) rate for the surgical cohort was 28%, and the pCR and near CR rates (0%-1% residual cells) were 50%. While there were significantly fewer local-regional recurrences in the preoperative group (3/29) than in the definitive CChT/PBT group (16/33) (log-rank test, p = 0.005), there were no differences in distant metastatic (DM)-free interval or overall survival (OS) between the two groups.ConclusionsThis is the first report of patients treated with PBT/CChT for esophageal cancer. Our data suggest that this modality is associated with a few severe toxicities, but the pathologic response and clinical outcomes are encouraging. Prospective comparison with more traditional approach is warranted.
| S-EPMC3923631 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Protons interact with human tissue differently than do photons and these differences can be exploited in an attempt to improve the care of lung cancer patients. This review examines proton beam therapy (PBT) as a component of a combined modality program for locally advanced lung cancers. It was specifically written for the non-radiation oncologist who desires greater understanding of this newer treatment modality. This review describes and compares photon (X-ray) radiotherapy (XRT) to PBT. The physical differences of these beams are described and the clinical literature is reviewed. Protons can be used to create treatment plans delivering significantly lower doses of radiation to the adjacent organs at risk (lungs, esophagus, and bone marrow) than photons. Clinically, PBT combined with chemotherapy has resulted in low rates of toxicity compared to XRT. Early results suggest a possible improvement in survival. The clinical results of proton therapy in lung cancer patients reveal relatively low rates of toxicity and possible survival benefits. One randomized study is being performed and another is planned to clarify the clinical differences in patient outcome for PBT compared to XRT. Along with the development of better systemic therapy, newer forms of radiotherapy such as PBT should positively impact the care of lung cancer patients. This review provides the reader with the current status of this new technology in treating locally advanced lung cancer.
| S-EPMC4129522 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Proton beam therapy (PBT) delivers less dose to nearby normal organs compared to X-ray therapy (XRT), which is particularly relevant for treating liver cancers given that both mean and low liver dose are among the most significant predictors of radiation induced liver disease (RILD). High-dose PBT has been shown to achieve excellent long-term tumor control with minimal toxicity in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. Increasing data support ablative PBT for patients with unresectable cholangiocarcinoma or liver metastases, especially those with larger tumors not suitable for XRT.
| S-EPMC7052772 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A transparent and equitable process for selecting patients who will benefit most from treatment at the Australian Bragg Centre for Proton Therapy as well as providing cost benefit for the investment made by government for this valuable resource, needs to be in place as soon as the Centre becomes operational, particularly for patients with more common cancers. Markov modelling is one method of patient selection and an example is provided in this issue of the Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences.
| S-EPMC7890916 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are few comparative outcomes data regarding the therapeutic delivery of proton beam therapy (PBT) versus the more widely used photon-based external-beam radiation (EBRT) and brachytherapy (BT). We evaluated the impact of PBT on overall survival (OS) compared to EBRT or BT on patients with localized prostate cancer.Patients and methodsThe National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was queried for 2004-2015. Men with clinical stage T1-3, N0, M0 prostate cancer treated with radiation, without surgery or chemotherapy, were included. OS, the primary clinical outcome, was fit by Cox proportional hazard model. Propensity score matching was implemented for covariate balance.ResultsThere were 276,880 eligible patients with a median follow-up of 80.9 months. A total of 4900 (1.8%) received PBT, while 158,111 (57.1%) received EBRT and 113,869 (41.1%) BT. Compared to EBRT and BT, PBT patients were younger and were less likely to be in the high-risk group. On multivariable analysis, compared to PBT, men had worse OS after EBRT (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.51-1.96) or BT (adjusted HR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.21-1.58). After propensity score matching, the OS benefit of PBT remained significant compared to EBRT (HR = 1.64; 95% CI, 1.32-2.04) but not BT (adjusted HR = 1.18; 95% CI, 0.93-1.48). The improvement in OS with PBT was most prominent in men ≤ 65 years old with low-risk disease compared to other subgroups (interaction P < .001).ConclusionIn this national data set, PBT was associated with a significant OS benefit compared to EBRT, and with outcomes similar to BT. These results remain to be validated by ongoing prospective trials.
| S-EPMC7914293 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Precision radiotherapy, which accurately delivers the dose on a tumor and confers little or no irradiation to the surrounding normal tissue and organs, results in maximum tumor control and decreases the toxicity to the utmost extent. Proton beam therapy (PBT) provides superior dose distributions and has a dosimetric advantage over photon beam therapy. Initially, the clinical practice and study of proton beam therapy focused on ocular tumor, skull base, paraspinal tumors (chondrosarcoma and chordoma), and unresectable sarcomas, which responded poorly when treated with photon radiotherapy. Then, it is widely regarded as an ideal mode for reirradiation and pediatrics due to reducing unwanted side effects by lessening the dose to normal tissue. During the past decade, the application of PBT has been rapidly increasing worldwide and gradually expanding for the treatment of various malignancies. However, to date, the role of PBT in clinical settings is still controversial, and there are considerable challenges in its application. We systematically review the latest advances of PBT and the challenges for patient treatment in the era of precision medicine.
| S-EPMC6290507 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Oropharyngeal cancers related to the human papillomavirus are a growing segment of head and neck cancers throughout the world. These cancers are biologically and demographically unique with patients presenting at younger ages and with more curable disease. This combination of factors heightens the importance of normal tissue sparing because patients will live a long time with treatment sequelae. Proton therapy has demonstrated benefits in reducing normal tissue exposure, which may lead to less toxicity, a higher quality of life, less immunologic suppression, and lower cost. Research investigating deintensified radiation volumes and doses are also underway. These deintensification studies synergize well with the beam characteristics of proton beam therapy and can decrease that already reduced normal tissue exposure enabled by proton therapy. Future studies should refine patient selection to best allow for volume and dose reduction paired with proton therapy.
| S-EPMC8270104 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Proton therapy is a promising, but costly, treatment for prostate cancer. Theoretical physical advantages exist; yet to date, it has been shown only to be comparably safe and effective when compared with the alternatives and not necessarily superior. If clinically meaningful benefits do exist for patients, more rigorous study will be needed to detect them and society will require this to justify the investment of time and money. New technical advances in proton beam delivery coupled with shortened overall treatment times and declining device costs have the potential to make this a more cost-effective therapy in the years ahead.
| S-EPMC3619274 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeWith high treatment costs and limited capacity, decisions on which adult patients to treat with proton beam therapy (PBT) must be based on the relative value compared to the current standard of care. Cost-utility analyses (CUAs) are the gold-standard method for doing this. We aimed to appraise the methodology and quality of CUAs in this area.Materials and methodsWe performed a systematic review of the literature to identify CUA studies of PBT in adult disease using MEDLINE, EMBASE, EconLIT, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Web of Science, and the Tufts Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry from 1st January 2010 up to 6th June 2018. General characteristics, information relating to modelling approaches, and methodological quality were extracted and synthesized narratively.ResultsSeven PBT CUA studies in adult disease were identified. Without randomised controlled trials to inform the comparative effectiveness of PBT, studies used either results from one-armed studies, or dose-response models derived from radiobiological and epidemiological studies of PBT. Costing methods varied widely. The assessment of model quality highlighted a lack of transparency in the identification of model parameters, and absence of external validation of model outcomes. Furthermore, appropriate assessment of uncertainty was often deficient.ConclusionIn order to foster credibility, future CUA studies must be more systematic in their approach to evidence synthesis and expansive in their consideration of uncertainties in light of the lack of clinical evidence.
| S-EPMC6854069 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe major drivers of carbon dioxide (CO2eq) emissions of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) are not well known and limit our ability to initiate mitigation strategies.Material and methodsWe describe the carbon footprint of four typical centers. We explore direct EBRT associated factors such as the impact of fractionation and use of MRI-LINAC, as well as indirect factors (e.g. patient rides). Treatment strategy related CO2eq emissions are included in a health technology assessment analysis that takes into account CO2eq emissions.ResultsA typical EBRT treatment emits from 185 kgCO2eq to 2066 kgCO2eq. CO2eq emissions are mostly driven by (i) accelerator acquisition and maintenance (37.8 %), (ii) patients and workers rides (32.7 %), (iii) drugs and medical devices (7.3 %), (iv) direct energy consumption (6.1 %), and (v) building and bunker construction (5.6 %) with a substantial heterogeneity among centers. Hypofractionation has a strong impact to mitigate emissions. MRI-LINAC is associated with a substantial increase in CO2eq emissions per fraction and requires ultra hypofractionation in 5 fractions to achieve a similar carbon footprint compared to 20 fractions treatment schemes. The expected limited small increase in toxicities due to hypofractionation (when existing) are in the same range as avoided detrimental effects to future people's health thanks to CO2eq mitigation.ConclusionCarbon footprint of EBRT is not neglectable and could be mitigated. When safely feasible, hypofractionation is one of the main factors to decrease this impact. Taking into account CO2eq emissions has a substantial impact on the health technology assessment of EBRT, favoring hypofractionated regimens.
| S-EPMC11359761 | biostudies-literature