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

被引:16
|
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
  • [1] The Promise of Proton Beam Therapy for Oesophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review of Dosimetric and Clinical Outcomes
    Nicholas, O.
    Prosser, S.
    Mortensen, H. R.
    Radhakrishna, G.
    Hawkins, M. A.
    Gwynne, S. H.
    CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2021, 33 (08) : E339 - E358
  • [2] Evaluating the Effectiveness of Proton Beam Therapy Compared to Conventional Radiotherapy in Non-Metastatic Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes
    Le, Kelvin
    Marchant, James Norton
    Le, Khang Duy Ricky
    MEDICINA-LITHUANIA, 2024, 60 (09):
  • [3] Clinical Benefits of Proton Beam Therapy for Tumors of the Skull Base
    Ahmed, Kamran A.
    Demetriou, Stephanie K.
    McDonald, Mark
    Johnstone, Peter A. S.
    CANCER CONTROL, 2016, 23 (03) : 213 - 219
  • [4] Proton therapy - A systematic review of clinical effectiveness
    Olsen, Dag Rune
    Bruland, Oyvind S.
    Frykholm, Gunilla
    Norderhaug, Inger Natvig
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2007, 83 (02) : 123 - 132
  • [5] Advances and Challenges in Conducting Clinical Trials With Proton Beam Therapy
    Choi, J. Isabelle
    Simone III, Charles B.
    Lozano, Alicia
    Frank, Steven J.
    SEMINARS IN RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2023, 33 (04) : 407 - 415
  • [6] Proton versus photon radiation therapy: A clinical review
    Chen, Zhe
    Dominello, Michael M. M.
    Joiner, Michael C. C.
    Burmeister, Jay W. W.
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2023, 13
  • [7] Proton beam therapy for craniopharyngioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Li, Zhi
    Li, Qingyong
    Tian, Haidong
    Wang, Maoqing
    Lin, Ru
    Bai, Juan
    Wang, Dandan
    Dong, Meng
    RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2024, 19 (01)
  • [8] A systematic review of health economic evaluations of proton beam therapy for adult cancer: Appraising methodology and quality
    Jones, David A.
    Smith, Joel
    Mei, Xue W.
    Hawkins, Maria A.
    Maughan, Tim
    van den Heuvel, Frank
    Mee, Thomas
    Kirkby, Karen
    Kirkby, Norman
    Gray, Alastair
    CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2020, 20 : 19 - 26
  • [9] The clinical case for proton beam therapy
    Foote, Robert L.
    Stafford, Scott L.
    Petersen, Ivy A.
    Pulido, Jose S.
    Clarke, Michelle J.
    Schild, Steven E.
    Garces, Yolanda I.
    Olivier, Kenneth R.
    Miller, Robert C.
    Haddock, Michael G.
    Yan, Elizabeth
    Laack, Nadia N.
    Arndt, Carola A. S.
    Buskirk, Steven J.
    Miller, Vickie L.
    Brent, Christopher R.
    Kruse, Jon J.
    Ezzell, Gary A.
    Herman, Michael G.
    Gunderson, Leonard L.
    Erlichman, Charles
    Diasio, Robert B.
    RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2012, 7
  • [10] A systematic review to evaluate the clinical benefits of craniosacral therapy
    Jaekel, Anne
    von Hauenschild, Philip
    COMPLEMENTARY THERAPIES IN MEDICINE, 2012, 20 (06) : 456 - 465