4.5 Review

Clock in radiation oncology clinics: cost-free modality to alleviate treatment-related toxicity

期刊

CANCER BIOLOGY & THERAPY
卷 23, 期 1, 页码 201-210

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/15384047.2022.2041953

关键词

Radiotherapy; chronotherapy; circadian rhythm; survival; toxicity

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Numerous studies have shown that tumor cells are often not synchronized with the surrounding healthy tissue. Exploiting this mismatch can lead to significant advantages in the therapeutic window. Based on a review of 24 studies, it was found that radiation therapy administered at specific times may result in less toxicity, possibly due to reduced damage to healthy cells. However, there are discrepancies among the studies, calling for further investigation. Mechanistic studies investigating the relationship between radiotherapy, circadian rhythms, and cell cycle, along with the use of digital or biological chronodata, could assist oncologists in effectively classifying individual patients according to their chronotypes and strategizing treatment plans accordingly.
A large number of studies have reported that tumor cells are often out of sync with the surrounding healthy tissue. Exploiting this misalignment may be a way to obtain a substantial gain in the therapeutic window. Specifically, based on reports to date, we will assess whether radiotherapy outcomes differ depending on the administration time. Collectively, 24 studies met the inclusion criteria, out of which 12 at least reported that radiation therapy is less toxic when administered at a particular time, probably because there is less collateral damage to healthy cells. However, discrepancies exist across studies and urge further investigation. Mechanistic studies elucidating the relationship between radiotherapy, circadian rhythms, and cell cycle, combined with either our digital or biological chronodata, would help oncologists successfully chronotype individual patients and strategize treatment plans accordingly.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据