Lara Hathout1, Terence M Williams2, Salma K Jabbour1. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. 2. The Ohio State University, James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) has been the standard technique in the treatment of rectal cancer. The use of new radiation treatment technologies such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), proton therapy (PT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and brachytherapy (BT) has been increasing over the past 10 years. This review will highlight the advantages and drawbacks of these techniques. RECENT FINDINGS: IMRT, PT, SBRT and BT achieve a higher target coverage conformity, a higher organ at risk sparing and enable dose escalation compared to 3DCRT. Some studies suggested a reduction in gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities and an increase in the complete pathologic response rate; however, the clinical benefit of these techniques remains controversial. SUMMARY: The results of these new techniques seem encouraging despite conclusive data. Further trials are required to establish their role in rectal cancer.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) has been the standard technique in the treatment of rectal cancer. The use of new radiation treatment technologies such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), proton therapy (PT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and brachytherapy (BT) has been increasing over the past 10 years. This review will highlight the advantages and drawbacks of these techniques. RECENT FINDINGS: IMRT, PT, SBRT and BT achieve a higher target coverage conformity, a higher organ at risk sparing and enable dose escalation compared to 3DCRT. Some studies suggested a reduction in gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities and an increase in the complete pathologic response rate; however, the clinical benefit of these techniques remains controversial. SUMMARY: The results of these new techniques seem encouraging despite conclusive data. Further trials are required to establish their role in rectal cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
IMRT; SBRT; novel technologies; proton therapy; rectal cancer
Authors: Robert Krempien; Falk Roeder; Susanne Oertel; Marianne Roebel; Jürgen Weitz; Frank W Hensley; Carmen Timke; Angela Funk; Marc Bischof; Angelika Zabel-Du Bois; Andreas G Niethammer; Michael J Eble; Markus W Buchler; Martina Treiber; Jürgen Debus Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-09-18 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Kathy L Baglan; Robert C Frazier; Di Yan; Raywin R Huang; Alvaro A Martinez; John M Robertson Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-01-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Mark S Roh; Linda H Colangelo; Michael J O'Connell; Greg Yothers; Melvin Deutsch; Carmen J Allegra; Morton S Kahlenberg; Luis Baez-Diaz; Carol S Ursiny; Nicholas J Petrelli; Norman Wolmark Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-09-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ari Ballonoff; Brian Kavanagh; Martin McCarter; Madeleine Kane; Nathan Pearlman; Russell Nash; Raj J Shah; David Raben; Tracey E Schefter Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Neil B Newman; Manpreet K Sidhu; Rekha Baby; Rebecca A Moss; Michael J Nissenblatt; Ting Chen; Shou-En Lu; Salma K Jabbour Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2016-01-05 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Zhifei Sun; Mohamed A Adam; Jina Kim; Brian Czito; Christopher Mantyh; John Migaly Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2016-08-10 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Salma K Jabbour; Shyamal Patel; Joseph M Herman; Aaron Wild; Suneel N Nagda; Taghrid Altoos; Ahmet Tunceroglu; Nilofer Azad; Susan Gearheart; Rebecca A Moss; Elizabeth Poplin; Lydia L Levinson; Ravi A Chandra; Dirk F Moore; Chunxia Chen; Bruce G Haffty; Richard Tuli Journal: Int J Surg Oncol Date: 2012-08-13