PURPOSE: Current estimates of the proportion of cancer patients who will require RT are based almost entirely on expert opinion. The objective of this study was to estimate the proportion of incident cases of colorectal cancer that should receive RT using an evidence-based approach. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify indications for RT for colorectal cancer, and to ascertain the level of evidence that supported each indication. An epidemiologic approach was then used to estimate the incidence of each indication for RT in a typical North American population of colorectal cancer patients. The effect of sampling error on the estimated appropriate rate of RT was calculated mathematically, and the effect of systematic error was estimated by sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: It was estimated that 23.7% +/- 1.0% of colorectal cancer cases develop one or more indications for RT at some point in the course of the illness: 20.9% +/- 1.1% as part of their initial treatment, and 2.8% +/- 0.5% later for recurrence or progression. We estimated that 7.1% +/- 0.8% of colon carcinoma patients will require RT at some point in the course of the illness: 4.0% +/- 0.7% as part of their initial treatment, and 3.1% +/- 0.4% later for recurrence or progression. We estimated that 72.3% +/- 1.0% of rectal carcinoma patients will require RT at some point in the course of the illness: 69.6% +/- 0.9% as part of their initial treatment and 2.7% +/- 0.2% later for recurrence or progression. CONCLUSIONS: This method provides a rational starting point for the long-term planning of radiation services, and for the audit of access to RT at the population level. By completing such evaluations in the major cancer sites, it will be possible to estimate the appropriate RT treatment rate for the cancer population as a whole.
PURPOSE: Current estimates of the proportion of cancerpatients who will require RT are based almost entirely on expert opinion. The objective of this study was to estimate the proportion of incident cases of colorectal cancer that should receive RT using an evidence-based approach. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify indications for RT for colorectal cancer, and to ascertain the level of evidence that supported each indication. An epidemiologic approach was then used to estimate the incidence of each indication for RT in a typical North American population of colorectal cancerpatients. The effect of sampling error on the estimated appropriate rate of RT was calculated mathematically, and the effect of systematic error was estimated by sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: It was estimated that 23.7% +/- 1.0% of colorectal cancer cases develop one or more indications for RT at some point in the course of the illness: 20.9% +/- 1.1% as part of their initial treatment, and 2.8% +/- 0.5% later for recurrence or progression. We estimated that 7.1% +/- 0.8% of colon carcinomapatients will require RT at some point in the course of the illness: 4.0% +/- 0.7% as part of their initial treatment, and 3.1% +/- 0.4% later for recurrence or progression. We estimated that 72.3% +/- 1.0% of rectal carcinomapatients will require RT at some point in the course of the illness: 69.6% +/- 0.9% as part of their initial treatment and 2.7% +/- 0.2% later for recurrence or progression. CONCLUSIONS: This method provides a rational starting point for the long-term planning of radiation services, and for the audit of access to RT at the population level. By completing such evaluations in the major cancer sites, it will be possible to estimate the appropriate RT treatment rate for the cancer population as a whole.
Authors: Amalia Palacios Eito; María Espinosa Calvo; Ana Mañas Rueda; Manuel de Las Heras Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Rebeca Sanz-Pamplona; David Cordero; Antonio Berenguer; Flavio Lejbkowicz; Hedy Rennert; Ramon Salazar; Sebastiano Biondo; Xavier Sanjuan; Miguel A Pujana; Laura Rozek; Thomas J Giordano; Ofer Ben-Izhak; Hector I Cohen; Philip Trougouboff; Jacob Bejhar; Yanina Sova; Gad Rennert; Stephen B Gruber; Victor Moreno Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-10-05 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Chun Chieh Lin; Suanna S Bruinooge; M Kelsey Kirkwood; Dawn L Hershman; Ahmedin Jemal; B Ashleigh Guadagnolo; James B Yu; Shane Hopkins; Michael Goldstein; Dean Bajorin; Sharon H Giordano; Michael Kosty; Anna Arnone; Amy Hanley; Stephanie Stevens; Christine Olsen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 7.038