4.7 Review

The evidence base for the use of internal dosimetry in the clinical practice of molecular radiotherapy

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-014-2824-5

关键词

Molecular radiotherapy; Dosimetry; Dose-effect relationship

资金

  1. Cancer Research UK [16464] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Molecular radiotherapy (MRT) has demonstrated unique therapeutic advantages in the treatment of an increasing number of cancers. As with other treatment modalities, there is related toxicity to a number of organs at risk. Despite the large number of clinical trials over the past several decades, considerable uncertainties still remain regarding the optimization of this therapeutic approach and one of the vital issues to be answered is whether an absorbed radiation dose-response exists that could be used to guide personalized treatment. There are only limited and sporadic data investigating MRT dosimetry. The determination of dose-effect relationships for MRT has yet to be the explicit aim of a clinical trial. The aim of this article was to collate and discuss the available evidence for an absorbed radiation dose-effect relationships in MRT through a review of published data. Based on a PubMed search, 92 papers were found. Out of 79 studies investigating dosimetry, an absorbed dose-effect correlation was found in 48. The application of radiobiological modelling to clinical data is of increasing importance and the limited published data on absorbed dose-effect relationships based on these models are also reviewed. Based on National Cancer Institute guideline definition, the studies had a moderate or low rate of clinical relevance due to the limited number of studies investigating overall survival and absorbed dose. Nevertheless, the evidence strongly implies a correlation between the absorbed doses delivered and the response and toxicity, indicating that dosimetry-based personalized treatments would improve outcome and increase survival.

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

4.7
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