Systematic review of methodology used in clinical studies evaluating the benefits of proton beam therapy

被引:17
|
作者
Ofuya, Mercy [1 ]
McParland, Lucy [2 ]
Murray, Louise [3 ,4 ]
Brown, Sarah [2 ]
Sebag-Montefiore, David [2 ,3 ]
Hall, Emma [1 ]
机构
[1] Inst Canc Res, Clin Trials & Stat Unit, London, England
[2] Univ Leeds, Leeds Inst Clin Trials Res, Clin Trials Res Unit, Leeds, W Yorkshire, England
[3] Leeds Teaching Hosp NHS Trust, Leeds Canc Ctr, Leeds, W Yorkshire, England
[4] Univ Leeds, Leeds Inst Mol Res, Leeds, W Yorkshire, England
关键词
Proton beam therapy; Randomized controlled trials; Clinical trial methodology; Patient reported outcomes; Systematic review; INTENSITY-MODULATED RADIOTHERAPY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; PHOTON RADIATION-THERAPY; PROSTATE-CANCER; PHASE-II; CONFORMAL PROTONS; QUALITY-ASSURANCE; OUTCOMES; TOXICITY; IRRADIATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.ctro.2019.07.002
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Proton beam therapy (PBT) delivers high-energy radiation to target tumours while sparing surrounding normal tissues. The dosimetric advantages of PBT over traditional photon radiotherapy may be clear but the translation of this benefit into clinically meaningful reductions in toxicities and improved quality-of-life (QoL) needs to be determined. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard for generating the highest-level evidence in medicine. The objectives of this systematic review were to provide an overview of published clinical studies evaluating the benefits of PBT, and to examine the methodology used in clinical trials with respect to study design and outcomes. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for published clinical studies where PBT was a cancer treatment intervention. All randomised and non-randomised studies, prospective or retrospective, were eligible for inclusion. Results: In total, 219 studies were included. Prospective studies comprised 89/219 (41%), and of these, the number of randomised phase II and III trials were 5/89 (6%) and 3/89 (3%) respectively. Of all the phase II and III trials, 18/24 (75%) were conducted at a single PBT centre. Over one-third of authors recommended an increase in length of follow up. Research design and/or findings were poorly reported in 74/89 (83%) of prospective studies. Patient reported outcomes were assessed in only 19/89 (21%) of prospective studies. Conclusions: Prospective randomised evidence for PBT is limited. The set-up of national PBT services in several countries provides an opportunity to guide the optimal design of prospective studies, including RCTs, to evaluate the benefits of PBT across various disease sites. Collaboration between PBT centres, both nationally and internationally, would increase potential for the generation of practice changing evidence. There is a need to facilitate and guide the collection and analysis of meaningful outcome data, including late toxicities and patient reported QoL. (C) 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology.
引用
收藏
页码:17 / 26
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] 455 Proton Beam Therapy in Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Fok, M.
    Toh, S.
    Maducolil, J. E.
    Fowler, H.
    Clifford, R.
    Parsons, J.
    Vimalachandran, D.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2021, 108 (SUPPL 2)
  • [32] Efficacy and safety of proton beam therapy for rhabdomyosarcoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Dong, Meng
    Wu, Jianrong
    Wu, Renhua
    Wang, Dandan
    Liu, Ruifeng
    Luo, Hongtao
    Wang, Yuhang
    Chen, Junru
    Ou, Yuhong
    Zhang, Qiuning
    Wang, Xiaohu
    RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2023, 18 (01)
  • [33] Efficacy and safety of proton beam therapy for rhabdomyosarcoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Meng Dong
    Jianrong Wu
    Renhua Wu
    Dandan Wang
    Ruifeng Liu
    Hongtao Luo
    Yuhang Wang
    Junru Chen
    Yuhong Ou
    Qiuning Zhang
    Xiaohu Wang
    Radiation Oncology, 18
  • [34] Robustness evaluation of pencil beam scanning proton therapy treatment planning: A systematic review
    Sterpin, E.
    Widesott, L.
    Poels, K.
    Hoogeman, M.
    Korevaar, E. W.
    Lowe, M.
    Molinelli, S.
    Fracchiolla, F.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2024, 197
  • [35] A Systematic Review Evaluating Racial and Ethnic Demographic Reporting for Patients Enrolled on Prospective Phase II Clinical Trials of Proton Therapy
    Fakhry, J.
    Pena, M. J.
    Giap, F.
    Pomputius, A.
    Kahn, J.
    Vega, R. Mailhot
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2022, 114 (03): : E132 - E132
  • [36] CLINICAL AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF PROTON BEAM RADIOTHERAPY FOR EYE CANCER: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
    Wlodarczyk, A.
    Jaworska, E.
    Budasz-Swiderska, M.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2012, 15 (07) : A411 - A411
  • [37] Clinical Outcomes of Proton Beam Therapy for Cholangiocarcinoma
    Makita, C.
    Nakamura, T.
    Takada, A.
    Takayama, K.
    Kato, T.
    Kikuchi, Y.
    Fuwa, N.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2012, 84 (03): : S325 - S325
  • [38] Clinical evidence of particle beam therapy (proton)
    Ogino, Takashi
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2012, 17 (02) : 79 - 84
  • [39] Clinical evidence of particle beam therapy (proton)
    Takashi Ogino
    International Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2012, 17 : 79 - 84
  • [40] Proton Therapy in Children: A Systematic Review of Clinical Effectiveness in 15 Pediatric Cancers
    Leroy, Roos
    Benahmed, Nadia
    Hulstaert, Frank
    Van Damme, Nancy
    De Ruysscher, Dirk
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2016, 95 (01): : 267 - 278