4.3 Article

Definitive radiation therapy in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Executive summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) evidence-based clinical practice guideline

期刊

PRACTICAL RADIATION ONCOLOGY
卷 5, 期 3, 页码 141-148

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2015.02.012

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ontario Institute of Cancer Research
  2. Calypso Medical Inc.
  3. Alliance Clinical Trials Cooperative Group
  4. Celgene
  5. Elekta Oncology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To provide guidance to physicians and patients with regard to the use of definitive external beam radiation therapy (RT) in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA NSCLC) based on available medical evidence complemented by consensus-based expert opinion. Methods and materials: A panel authorized by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Board of Directors and Guidelines Subcommittee conducted 3 systematic reviews on the following topics: (1) ideal radical RT dose fractionation for RT alone; (2) ideal radical RT dose fractionation for chemoradiation; and (3) ideal timing of radical radiation therapy with systemic chemotherapy. Practice guideline recommendations were approved using an a priori- defined consensusbuilding methodology supported by ASTRO and approved tools for the grading of evidence quality and the strength of guideline recommendations. Results: For patients managed by RT alone, a minimum dose of 60 Gy of RT is recommended. Dose escalation beyond 60 Gy in the context of combinedmodality concurrent chemoradiation has not been found to be associated with any clinical benefits. In the context of combined modality therapy, chemotherapy and radiation should ideally be given concurrently to maximize survival, local control, and disease response rate. Conclusions: A consensus and evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the definitive radiotherapeutic management of LA NSCLC has been created that addresses 3 important questions. (C) 2015 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.3
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