Samuel Ryu1, Ernesto Maranzano2, Steven E Schild3, Arjun Sahgal4, Yoshiya Yamada5, Peter Hoskin6, Dirk Rades7, Anushree Vichare8, Carol Hahn9, Tanya Holt10. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology and Neurosurgery, Stony Brook University, New York, USA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology Centre, "S. Maria" Hospital, Terni, Italy. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and the Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Canada. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA. 6. Consultant Clinical Oncologist, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre and Professor of Clinical Oncology, University College, London, U.K. 7. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lubeck, Germany. 8. ASTRO, 8280 Willow Oaks Corporate Drive, Suite 500, Fairfax, VA 22031, USA. 9. Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 10. Department of Radiation Oncology Mater Centre, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Treatment of metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) varies significantly. It is useful to understand how radiation oncologists worldwide deal with these challenging and urgent cases. Therefore, a survey of practice patterns of metastatic spinal cord compression was performed among the members of the major radiation oncology organizations in the world to help improve clinical practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The survey questions addressed common clinical issues related to the diagnosis and treatment of spinal cord compression in the context of the available data. The survey of practice pattern in the management of MSCC was performed in 2010. There were a total of 269 survey respondents, and 90% of respondents were from hospital-based practice. Statistical analyses were performed at ASTRO headquarter using Microsoft Excel and SPSS. RESULTS: The practice pattern of initial diagnostic and clinical evaluation of patients for MSCC was fairly uniform across the continents and countries. Treatment decision was largely based on patient's general condition, overall oncologic status, and concomitant systemic chemotherapy in this survey. EBRT dose and fractionation patterns were determined by considering the estimated survival time, neurological status such as ambulatory status, previous radiation, and radiation treatment volume. Despite of using similar factors in making treatment decision, there was a significant difference in selecting the radiation dose and fractionation scheme. Selection of re-treatment radiation dose also varied and generally below the published tolerance dose. CONCLUSIONS: Selection of radiation dose and fractionation varied significantly among different continents and countries, while using similar factors to make treatment decision.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Treatment of metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) varies significantly. It is useful to understand how radiation oncologists worldwide deal with these challenging and urgent cases. Therefore, a survey of practice patterns of metastatic spinal cord compression was performed among the members of the major radiation oncology organizations in the world to help improve clinical practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The survey questions addressed common clinical issues related to the diagnosis and treatment of spinal cord compression in the context of the available data. The survey of practice pattern in the management of MSCC was performed in 2010. There were a total of 269 survey respondents, and 90% of respondents were from hospital-based practice. Statistical analyses were performed at ASTRO headquarter using Microsoft Excel and SPSS. RESULTS: The practice pattern of initial diagnostic and clinical evaluation of patients for MSCC was fairly uniform across the continents and countries. Treatment decision was largely based on patient's general condition, overall oncologic status, and concomitant systemic chemotherapy in this survey. EBRT dose and fractionation patterns were determined by considering the estimated survival time, neurological status such as ambulatory status, previous radiation, and radiation treatment volume. Despite of using similar factors in making treatment decision, there was a significant difference in selecting the radiation dose and fractionation scheme. Selection of re-treatment radiation dose also varied and generally below the published tolerance dose. CONCLUSIONS: Selection of radiation dose and fractionation varied significantly among different continents and countries, while using similar factors to make treatment decision.
Authors: E Maranzano; P Latini; E Perrucci; S Beneventi; M Lupattelli; E Corgna Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1997-07-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Mark H Bilsky; Ilya Laufer; Daryl R Fourney; Michael Groff; Meic H Schmidt; Peter Paul Varga; Frank D Vrionis; Yoshiya Yamada; Peter C Gerszten; Timothy R Kuklo Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2010-09
Authors: Dirk Rades; Sarah Douglas; Theo Veninga; Lukas J A Stalpers; Peter J Hoskin; Amira Bajrovic; Irenaeus A Adamietz; Hiba Basic; Juergen Dunst; Steven E Schild Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-08-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Dirk Rades; Volker Rudat; Theo Veninga; Lukas J A Stalpers; Peter J Hoskin; Steven E Schild Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-09-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Samuel Ryu; Jack Rock; Rajan Jain; Mei Lu; Joseph Anderson; Jian-Yue Jin; Mark Rosenblum; Benjamin Movsas; Jae Ho Kim Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-05-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Robert T Arrigo; Paul Kalanithi; Ivan Cheng; Todd Alamin; Eugene J Carragee; Stefan A Mindea; Jongsoo Park; Maxwell Boakye Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: R Venkitaraman; S A Sohaib; Y Barbachano; C C Parker; R A Huddart; A Horwich; D Dearnaley Journal: Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) Date: 2010-01-12 Impact factor: 4.126
Authors: Jacob Y Shin; Noah J Mathis; Neil Ari Wijetunga; Divya Yerramilli; Daniel S Higginson; Adam M Schmitt; Daniel R Gomez; Yoshiya J Yamada; Jonathan T Yang Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-02-04