A survey of intensity‐modulated radiation therapy use in the United States

Mell, Loren K.; Roeske, John C.; Mundt, Arno J.

doi:10.1002/cncr.11489

Cited by 91 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 86 publications

(65 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is a significant change compared with the survey results reported in 2002, in which 32.1% of radiation oncologists in the United States reported using IMRT. 23 In addition, on a follow-up survey, IMRT use in 2004 was 73.2%; and, of those who were using IMRT, 80.5% used it for head and neck cancers. 24 It also was reported that the adoption rate from 2002 to 2004 was 62.7%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survey on human papillomavirus/p16 screening use in oropharyngeal carcinoma patients in the United States

Shoushtari

Rahimi

Schlesinger

et al. 2009

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND:Patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma (OC) have better prognosis than patients with HPV-negative OC. The objective of the current study was to assess how different practices across the United States treat patients with OC with respect to screening for HPV DNA or p16. METHODS: Five hundred forty-two randomly selected radiation oncologists were sent an 11-question survey by email regarding the use of HPV/p16 screening in OC. The questionnaire addressed demographics of the practice, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) use, screening practices for HPV DNA or p16, which year this began, the use of HPV or p16 data to direct patient care, and future plans for its use if it had not already been instituted. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-two responses (39.6%) were received. Thirty-five percent of respondents (67 of 188) reported screening for HPV DNA routinely, whereas 4.8% of respondents (9 of 188) reported screening for p16. Of the physicians who did not use screening techniques, 37.2% (44 of 118 respondents) reported future plans to institute these screening techniques, 20% (9 of 45 respondents) stated plans to institute these techniques in the next 6 months, 55.5% (25 of 45 respondents) stated plans to institute these techniques within 6 months to 1 year, and 22.2% (10 of 45 respondents) stated plans to institute these techniques within 1 to 2 years. Academic physicians were more likely to use screening techniques (62.7%; P < .001) compared with private practitioners (31.4%). Only 12.4% of respondents reported using HPV or p16 data to direct care. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 40.4% of radiation oncology practices that responded to a survey in the United States screened for HPV DNA or p16 in OC, whereas only 12.4% used it to further direct care. This number appears to be growing rapidly. Clinical trials to further elucidate how HPV or p16 status should direct care in OC are warranted. Cancer 2010;116:514-9.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survey on human papillomavirus/p16 screening use in oropharyngeal carcinoma patients in the United States

Shoushtari

Rahimi

Schlesinger

et al. 2009

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In head and neck (HN) malignancies, IMRT appears to be more and more commonly used for routine treatment, especially in the U.S. [1]. However, only a few randomized trials have demonstrated its superiority over conventional treatments [2] and only a few meaningful retrospective studies are available that demonstrate its potential and its possible drawbacks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Carcinoma

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After completing this course, the reader will be able to:1. Outline innovations related to targeted radiation therapy.2. Describe trials proving an advantage using IMRT.3. Assess treatment planning modalities and how IMRT fields are designed.4. Evaluate when there is a toxicity advantage for IMRT.5. Discern when conventional radiotherapy should be used instead of IMRT.Access and take the CME test online and receive 1 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit ™ at CME.TheOncologist.com CME CME ABSTRACT Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for head and neck tumors refers to a new approach that aims at increasing the radiation dose gradient between the target tissues and the surrounding normal tissues at risk, thus offering the prospect of increasing the locoregional control probability while decreasing the complication rate. As a prerequisite, IMRT requires a proper selection and delineation of target volumes. For the latter, recent data indicate the potential of functional imaging to complement anatomic imaging modalities. Nonrandomized clinical series in paranasal sinuses and pharyngolaryngeal carcinoma have shown that IMRT was able to achieve a very high rate of locoregional control with less morbidity, such as dry-eye syndrome, xerostomia, and swallowing dysfunction. The promising results of IMRT are likely to be achieved when many treatment conditions are met, for example, optimal selection and delineation of the target volumes and organs at risk, appropriate physical quality control of the irradiation, and accurate patient setup with the use of onboard imaging. Because of the complexity of the various tasks, it is thus likely that these conditions will only be

show abstract

“…In a recent survey, nearly 33% of radiation oncologists in the United States stated that they now use IMRT in their clinics, with 80% having implemented IMRT only within the last 1-2 years. 1 Despite the enthusiasm, IMRT remains a new and unproven technology. Although numerous comparisons of IMRT and conventional planning have been presented, outcome studies involving patients who were treated with IMRT are limited.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intensity‐modulated radiotherapy and the Internet

Schomas

Milano

Roeske

et al. 2004

Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUNDThe objective of the current study was to evaluate the content and quality of patient‐oriented information regarding intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) on the Internet.METHODSIMRT websites were identified by reviewing the first 50 uniform resource locators on 5 search engines using the search terms IMRT and intensity modulated radiation therapy. Each site was evaluated by three observers for informational content, presentation, accuracy, and balance. A score of low, moderate, or high was assigned to each category based on a predefined scoring system. An overall score was assigned to each site, ranging from −35 to 100 points.RESULTSSeventy‐seven patient‐oriented IMRT websites were identified (45% private, 21% academic, and 18% commercial). Most sites (58%) had a low level of informational content, with information on fundamental aspects of IMRT planning (target delineation and inverse planning) appearing on < 50% of sites. The most commonly discussed tumors were genitourinary (65%) and head and neck (53%) lesions. Few sites, however, described the potential benefits of IMRT (toxicity and tumor control). Most sites (82%) used patient‐appropriate language. False and/or misleading information was seen on 42% of sites and was equally common on academic, private, and commercial sites. Balance statements were present on 24% of sites (most of which were commercial). The median overall score was 20 points (range, −25 to 70 points). The median overall scores for academic, private, commercial, and other sites were 10, 20, 25, and 20 points, respectively (P = 0.26).CONCLUSIONSIn general, the content and quality of patient‐oriented information regarding IMRT on the Internet were poor. Patients and their physicians need to be aware of these problems when selecting treatment courses. Cancer 2004. © 2004 American Cancer Society.

show abstract

A survey of intensity‐modulated radiation therapy use in the United States

Cited by 91 publications

References 86 publications

Survey on human papillomavirus/p16 screening use in oropharyngeal carcinoma patients in the United States

Survey on human papillomavirus/p16 screening use in oropharyngeal carcinoma patients in the United States

Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Carcinoma

Intensity‐modulated radiotherapy and the Internet

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About