O J Ott1, S Hertel, U S Gaipl, B Frey, M Schmidt, R Fietkau. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Universitätsstr. 27, 91054, Erlangen, Germany, oliver.ott@uk-erlangen.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To evaluate the long-term efficacy of pain reduction by two dose fractionation schedules used for low-dose radiotherapy of painful elbow syndrome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between February 2006 and February 2010, 199 evaluable patients were recruited for this prospective trial. All patients received low-dose orthovoltage radiotherapy. One course consisted of 6 fractions in 3 weeks. In the case of insufficient pain remission after 6 weeks, a second course was administered. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups to receive single doses of either 0.5 or 1.0 Gy. Endpoint was pain reduction. Pain was measured before radiotherapy, as well as immediately after (early response), 6 weeks after (delayed response) and approximately 3 years after (long-term response) completion of radiotherapy using a questionnaire-based visual analogue scale (VAS) and a comprehensive pain score (CPS). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 35 months (range 9-57 months). The overall early, delayed and long-term response rates for all patients were 80, 90 and 94 %, respectively. The mean VAS scores before treatment and those for early, delayed and long-term response in the 0.5- and 1.0-Gy groups were 59.6 ± 20.2 and 55.7 ± 18.0 (p = 0.46); 32.1 ± 24.5 and 34.4 ± 22.5 (p = 0.26); 27.0 ± 27.7 and 23.5 ± 21.6 (p = 0.82) and 10.7 ± 15.0 and 21.5 ± 26.9 (p = 0.12), respectively. The mean CPS values before treatment and those for early, delayed and long-term response were 8.7 ± 2.9 and 8.1 ± 3.1 (p = 0.21); 4.5 ± 3.2 and 5.0 ± 3.4 (p = 0.51); 3.9 ± 3.6 and 2.8 ± 2.8 (p = 0.19) and 1.5 ± 2.3 and 2.4 ± 3.5 (p = 0.27), respectively. No significant differences in the quality of the long-term response were found between the 0.5- and 1.0-Gy arms (p = 0.28). CONCLUSION:Low-dose radiotherapy is an effective treatment for the management of benign painful elbow syndrome. For radiation protection reasons, the dose for a radiotherapy series should not exceed 3.0 Gy.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To evaluate the long-term efficacy of pain reduction by two dose fractionation schedules used for low-dose radiotherapy of painful elbow syndrome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between February 2006 and February 2010, 199 evaluable patients were recruited for this prospective trial. All patients received low-dose orthovoltage radiotherapy. One course consisted of 6 fractions in 3 weeks. In the case of insufficient pain remission after 6 weeks, a second course was administered. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups to receive single doses of either 0.5 or 1.0 Gy. Endpoint was pain reduction. Pain was measured before radiotherapy, as well as immediately after (early response), 6 weeks after (delayed response) and approximately 3 years after (long-term response) completion of radiotherapy using a questionnaire-based visual analogue scale (VAS) and a comprehensive pain score (CPS). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 35 months (range 9-57 months). The overall early, delayed and long-term response rates for all patients were 80, 90 and 94 %, respectively. The mean VAS scores before treatment and those for early, delayed and long-term response in the 0.5- and 1.0-Gy groups were 59.6 ± 20.2 and 55.7 ± 18.0 (p = 0.46); 32.1 ± 24.5 and 34.4 ± 22.5 (p = 0.26); 27.0 ± 27.7 and 23.5 ± 21.6 (p = 0.82) and 10.7 ± 15.0 and 21.5 ± 26.9 (p = 0.12), respectively. The mean CPS values before treatment and those for early, delayed and long-term response were 8.7 ± 2.9 and 8.1 ± 3.1 (p = 0.21); 4.5 ± 3.2 and 5.0 ± 3.4 (p = 0.51); 3.9 ± 3.6 and 2.8 ± 2.8 (p = 0.19) and 1.5 ± 2.3 and 2.4 ± 3.5 (p = 0.27), respectively. No significant differences in the quality of the long-term response were found between the 0.5- and 1.0-Gy arms (p = 0.28). CONCLUSION: Low-dose radiotherapy is an effective treatment for the management of benign painful elbow syndrome. For radiation protection reasons, the dose for a radiotherapy series should not exceed 3.0 Gy.
Authors: Barbara Lödermann; Roland Wunderlich; Silke Frey; Christine Schorn; Sonja Stangl; Franz Rödel; Ludwig Keilholz; Rainer Fietkau; Udo S Gaipl; Benjamin Frey Journal: Int J Radiat Biol Date: 2012-05-22 Impact factor: 2.694
Authors: F Rödel; B Frey; U Gaipl; L Keilholz; C Fournier; K Manda; H Schöllnberger; G Hildebrandt; C Rödel Journal: Curr Med Chem Date: 2012 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Franz Rödel; Benjamin Frey; Katrin Manda; Guido Hildebrandt; Stephanie Hehlgans; Ludwig Keilholz; M Heinrich Seegenschmiedt; Udo S Gaipl; Claus Rödel Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2012-09-25 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Oliver J Ott; Oliver Micke; Ralph Mücke; Marcus Niewald; Franz Rödel; Ulrich Schäfer; M H Seegenschmiedt; Meritxell Arenas; Benjamin Frey; Udo S Gaipl Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2018-12-18 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Matthias G Hautmann; Philipp Rechner; Matthias Hipp; Ulrich Neumaier; Felix Steger; Fabian Pohl; Markus Weber; Oliver Kölbl; Christoph Süß Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2019-07-25 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Oliver J Ott; Marcus Niewald; Hajo-Dirk Weitmann; Ingrid Jacob; Irenaeus A Adamietz; Ulrich Schaefer; Ludwig Keilholz; Reinhard Heyd; Ralph Muecke Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2014-09-20 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Michael Rückert; Lisa Deloch; Rainer Fietkau; Benjamin Frey; Markus Hecht; Udo S Gaipl Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2018-03-02 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Alexander Kaltenborn; Ulrich Martin Carl; Tanja Hinsche; Mirko Nitsche; Robert Michael Hermann Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2016-11-11 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: B Álvarez; A Montero; R Alonso; J Valero; M López; R Ciérvide; E Sánchez; O Hernando; M García-Aranda; J Martí; A Prado; X Chen-Zhao; C Rubio Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2021-09-29 Impact factor: 3.405