Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros

Métodos Terapéuticos y Terapias MTCI
Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Radiother Oncol ; 163: 55-67, 2021 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34333087

RESUMEN

In patients with bone metastases (BM), radiotherapy (RT) is used to alleviate symptoms, reduce the risk of fracture, and improve quality of life (QoL). However, with the emergence of concepts like oligometastases, minimal invasive surgery, ablative therapies such as stereotactic ablative RT (SABR), radiosurgery (SRS), thermal ablation, and new systemic anticancer therapies, there have been a paradigm shift in the multidisciplinary approach to BM with the aim of preserving mobility and function survival. Despite guidelines on using single-dose RT in uncomplicated BM, its use remains relatively low. In uncomplicated BM, single-fraction RT produces similar overall and complete response rates to RT with multiple fractions, although it is associated with a higher retreatment rate of 20% versus 8%. Complicated BM can be characterised as the presence of impending or existing pathologic fracture, a major soft tissue component, existing spinal cord or cauda equina compression and neuropathic pain. The rate of complicated BM is around 35%. Unfortunately, there is a lack of prospective trials on RT in complicated BM and the best dose/fractionation regimen is not yet established. There are contradictory outcomes in studies reporting BM pain control rates and time to pain reduction when comparing SABR with Conventional RT. While some studies showed that SABR produces a faster reduction in pain and higher pain control rates than conventional RT, other studies did not show differences. Moreover, the local control rate for BM treated with SABR is higher than 80% in most studies, and the rate of grade 3 or 4 toxicity is very low. The use of SABR may be preferred in three circumstances: reirradiation, oligometastatic disease, and radioresistant tumours. Local ablative therapies like SABR can delay change or use of systemic therapy, preserve patients' Qol, and improve disease-free survival, progression-free survival and overall survival. Moreover, despite the potential benefit of SABR in oligometastatic disease, there is a need to establish the optial indication, RT dose fractionation, prognostic factors and optimal timing in combination with systemic therapies for SABR. This review evaluates the role of RT in BM considering these recent treatment advances. We consider the definition of complicated BM, use of single and multiple fractions RT for both complicated and uncomplicated BM, reirradiation, new treatment paradigms including local ablative treatments, oligometastatic disease, systemic therapy, physical activity and rehabilitation.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Óseas , Radiocirugia , Neoplasias Óseas/radioterapia , Fraccionamiento de la Dosis de Radiación , Humanos , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Calidad de Vida
2.
Support Care Cancer ; 25(1): 309-316, 2017 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27624464

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) are distressing symptoms. Evidence-based guidelines should facilitate the prescription of the best possible antiemetic prophylaxis. As part of the MASCC/ESMO Antiemetic Guidelines Update 2016, a thorough review of the literature concerning RINV since the 2009 update was required. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature including data published from June 2009 to May 2015 was performed. Committee VII (RINV) under the MASCC/ESMO Antiemetic Guidelines Update Committee assessed the literature. RESULTS: The searches yielded 926 records, 906 records were excluded, leaving 20 records for full text assessment, and 18 publications were finally included. The only fully published randomized studies in prevention of RINV were two negative studies in acupuncture and green tea, respectively. No data to support new recommendations for antiemetic prophylaxis in RINV was available. However, based on expert opinions, the committee agreed on changes in emetic risk level for certain sites of irradiation. CONCLUSIONS: The serotonin receptor antagonists are still the corner stone in antiemetic prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting induced by high and moderate emetic risk radiotherapy. The studies available since the last update did not change recommendations for antiemetic prophylaxis. The emetogenicity of craniospinal radiotherapy was reclassified from low to moderate emetic level along with some other minor changes. In the future, RINV prophylaxis in single fraction, multiple fraction, and in concomitant chemo-radiotherapy still need to be explored with regard to the different classes and combinations of antiemetic drugs.


Asunto(s)
Antieméticos/uso terapéutico , Náusea/etiología , Náusea/prevención & control , Traumatismos por Radiación/prevención & control , Vómitos/etiología , Vómitos/prevención & control , Consenso , Humanos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Radioterapia/efectos adversos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Riesgo
3.
Anticancer Res ; 33(10): 4557-66, 2013 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24123031

RESUMEN

AIM: To evaluate survival outcomes of patients in pStage II-III rectal cancer treated with adjuvant 5-fluorouracil-based radiochemotherapy and to retrospectively analyze the impact of prognostic variables on local control, metastasis-free survival and cause-specific survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1,338 patients, treated between 1985-2005 for locally advanced rectal cancer, who underwent surgery and postoperative 5-fluorouracil-based chemoradiation, were selected. RESULTS: The actuarial 5- and 10-year outcomes were: local control 87.0%-84.1%, disease-free survival 61.6%-52.1%, metastasis-free survival 72.0%-67.2%, cause-specific survival 70.4%-57.5%, and overall survival 63.8%-53.4%. Better outcomes were observed in patients with IIA, IIIA stage. Multivariate analyses showed that variables significantly affecting metastasis-free survival were pT4 and pN2, while for cancer-specific survival those variables were age >65 years, pT4, pN1, pN2, distal tumors and number of lymph nodes removed ≤ 12. CONCLUSION: This study confirmed that among stage II-III rectal cancer patients there are subgroups of patients with different clinical outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Antimetabolitos Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias del Recto/terapia , Quimioradioterapia , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Metástasis Linfática , Periodo Posoperatorio , Pronóstico , Neoplasias del Recto/mortalidad , Neoplasias del Recto/patología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA