G Francolini1, G Timon2, F Matrone3, G Marvaso4, L Nicosia5, L Ognibene6, A Vinciguerra7, L E Trodella8, C Franzese9, P Borghetti10, B A Jereczek-Fossa11,12, S Arcangeli13. 1. Radiotherapy Department, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. francolinigiulio@gmail.com. 2. Radioterapia Oncologica, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Centro di Riferimento, Oncologico di Aviano CRO-IRCCS, Aviano, PN, Italy. 4. Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy. 5. Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, Cancer Care Center, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Verona, Negrar, Italy. 6. Radiotheray Unit, San Gaetano Radiotherapy and Nuclear Medicine Center, Palermo, Italy. 7. Department of Radiation Oncology, "SS Annunziata" Hospital, "G. D'Annunzio" University, Via dei Vestini, 66100, Chieti, Italy. 8. Radiation Oncology, Campus Bio-Medico University, Via A. del Portillo, 21, 00128, Rome, Italy. 9. Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital-IRCCS, Via Manzoni 56, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. 10. Radiation Oncology Department, University and Spedali Civili of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. 11. Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. 12. Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy. 13. Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Postoperative prostate cancer patients are a heterogeneous population, and many prognostic factors (e.g., local staging, PSA kinetics, margin status, histopathological features) may influence their clinical management. In this complex scenario, univocal recommendations are often lacking. For these reasons, the present survey was developed by the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) to collect the opinion of Italian radiation oncologists and delineate a representation of current clinical practice in our country. METHODS: A questionnaire was administered online to AIRO (Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology) members registered in 2020 with a clinical interest in uro-oncological disease. RESULTS: Sixty-one per cent of AIRO members answered the proposed survey. Explored topics included career and expertise, indications to adjuvant RT, additional imaging in biochemical recurrence setting, use of salvage radiotherapy (SRT), management of clinically evident locoregional recurrence and future considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, good level of agreement was found between participants for most of the topics. Most debated issues regarded, as expected, implementation of new imaging methods in this setting. Notably, trend in favour of early SRT vs. immediate adjuvant RT was underlined, and preference for global evaluation rather than isolated risk factors for RT indications was noticed.
OBJECTIVES: Postoperative prostate cancer patients are a heterogeneous population, and many prognostic factors (e.g., local staging, PSA kinetics, margin status, histopathological features) may influence their clinical management. In this complex scenario, univocal recommendations are often lacking. For these reasons, the present survey was developed by the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) to collect the opinion of Italian radiation oncologists and delineate a representation of current clinical practice in our country. METHODS: A questionnaire was administered online to AIRO (Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology) members registered in 2020 with a clinical interest in uro-oncological disease. RESULTS: Sixty-one per cent of AIRO members answered the proposed survey. Explored topics included career and expertise, indications to adjuvant RT, additional imaging in biochemical recurrence setting, use of salvage radiotherapy (SRT), management of clinically evident locoregional recurrence and future considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, good level of agreement was found between participants for most of the topics. Most debated issues regarded, as expected, implementation of new imaging methods in this setting. Notably, trend in favour of early SRT vs. immediate adjuvant RT was underlined, and preference for global evaluation rather than isolated risk factors for RT indications was noticed.
Authors: G Francolini; B Detti; M Bottero; T Zilli; A Lancia; A Bruni; S Borghesi; M Mariotti; P Castellucci; S Fanti; A R Filippi; M A Teriaca; V Maragna; C Aristei; E Mazzeo; L Livi; G Ingrosso Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: C Parker; E Castro; K Fizazi; A Heidenreich; P Ost; G Procopio; B Tombal; S Gillessen Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2020-06-25 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Esther Mena; Maria L Lindenberg; Joanna H Shih; Stephen Adler; Stephanie Harmon; Ethan Bergvall; Deborah Citrin; William Dahut; Anita T Ton; Yolanda McKinney; Juanita Weaver; Philip Eclarinal; Alicia Forest; George Afari; Sibaprasad Bhattacharyya; Ronnie C Mease; Maria J Merino; Peter Pinto; Bradford J Wood; Paula Jacobs; Martin G Pomper; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-09-11 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Ciro Franzese; Beatrice Marini; Davide Baldaccini; Marco Badalamenti; Pierina Navarria; Luisa Bellu; Davide Franceschini; Tiziana Comito; Elena Clerici; Maria Ausilia Teriaca; Maria Massaro; Luciana Di Cristina; Lorenzo Lo Faro; Stefano Tomatis; Marta Scorsetti Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2022-09-15 Impact factor: 4.322