Prospects and Disadvantages of Intraoperative Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review.

Q2 Medicine
Yedil Kulanbayev
{"title":"Prospects and Disadvantages of Intraoperative Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Yedil Kulanbayev","doi":"10.31557/APJCP.2025.26.5.1507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and limitations of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) across different cancer types, with a focus on breast and head and neck cancers. The aim was to compare IORT with other radiotherapy techniques and assess its benefits and drawbacks in oncological settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eligibility criteria included clinical trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews involving at least 15 participants, focusing on the efficacy and safety of IORT in comparison to other radiotherapy methods. The literature search was conducted in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed databases using predefined keywords. A total of 60 studies were initially identified, with 44 meeting the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was assessed using standardized tools, including the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized studies. A qualitative synthesis was performed, integrating data on local control (LC), overall survival (OS), recurrence rates, and treatment-related complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 60 studies identified, 46 were included in the final analysis. These studies focused on various cancers, with a particular emphasis on breast cancer and head and neck cancer. The synthesis revealed that IORT offers several benefits, such as reduced treatment time and better local control in specific patient populations. However, there were inconsistencies in outcomes depending on the radiation technique used, and long-term follow-up data were often lacking.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The evidence is limited by study heterogeneity, potential bias, and the absence of long-term data in some cases. While IORT demonstrates promising results, particularly in terms of reducing treatment duration and preserving healthy tissue, further high-quality studies are needed to strengthen the evidence base and clarify the long-term outcomes of IORT in different oncological settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":55451,"journal":{"name":"Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention","volume":"26 5","pages":"1507-1517"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31557/APJCP.2025.26.5.1507","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The primary objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and limitations of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) across different cancer types, with a focus on breast and head and neck cancers. The aim was to compare IORT with other radiotherapy techniques and assess its benefits and drawbacks in oncological settings.

Methods: Eligibility criteria included clinical trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews involving at least 15 participants, focusing on the efficacy and safety of IORT in comparison to other radiotherapy methods. The literature search was conducted in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed databases using predefined keywords. A total of 60 studies were initially identified, with 44 meeting the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was assessed using standardized tools, including the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized studies. A qualitative synthesis was performed, integrating data on local control (LC), overall survival (OS), recurrence rates, and treatment-related complications.

Results: Of the 60 studies identified, 46 were included in the final analysis. These studies focused on various cancers, with a particular emphasis on breast cancer and head and neck cancer. The synthesis revealed that IORT offers several benefits, such as reduced treatment time and better local control in specific patient populations. However, there were inconsistencies in outcomes depending on the radiation technique used, and long-term follow-up data were often lacking.

Conclusion: The evidence is limited by study heterogeneity, potential bias, and the absence of long-term data in some cases. While IORT demonstrates promising results, particularly in terms of reducing treatment duration and preserving healthy tissue, further high-quality studies are needed to strengthen the evidence base and clarify the long-term outcomes of IORT in different oncological settings.

术中放疗的前景与不足:系统综述。
目的:本系统综述的主要目的是评估术中放疗(IORT)在不同癌症类型中的有效性、安全性和局限性,重点是乳腺癌和头颈癌。目的是比较IORT与其他放疗技术,并评估其在肿瘤环境中的利弊。方法:入选标准包括临床试验、荟萃分析和系统评价,涉及至少15名参与者,重点是与其他放疗方法相比,IORT的有效性和安全性。使用预定义的关键词在Web of Science、Scopus和PubMed数据库中进行文献检索。最初共确定了60项研究,其中44项符合纳入标准。使用标准化工具评估偏倚风险,包括随机研究的Cochrane偏倚风险工具。进行定性综合,整合局部控制(LC)、总生存(OS)、复发率和治疗相关并发症的数据。结果:60项研究中,46项纳入最终分析。这些研究集中在各种癌症上,特别强调乳腺癌和头颈癌。综合显示IORT提供了一些好处,例如减少治疗时间和在特定患者群体中更好的局部控制。然而,根据所使用的放射技术,结果存在不一致性,并且经常缺乏长期随访数据。结论:证据受到研究异质性、潜在偏倚和某些病例缺乏长期数据的限制。虽然IORT显示出有希望的结果,特别是在缩短治疗时间和保存健康组织方面,但需要进一步的高质量研究来加强证据基础并阐明IORT在不同肿瘤环境中的长期结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
779
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Cancer is a very complex disease. While many aspects of carcinoge-nesis and oncogenesis are known, cancer control and prevention at the community level is however still in its infancy. Much more work needs to be done and many more steps need to be taken before effective strategies are developed. The multidisciplinary approaches and efforts to understand and control cancer in an effective and efficient manner, require highly trained scientists in all branches of the cancer sciences, from cellular and molecular aspects to patient care and palliation. The Asia Pacific Organization for Cancer Prevention (APOCP) and its official publication, the Asia Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention (APJCP), have served the community of cancer scientists very well and intends to continue to serve in this capacity to the best of its abilities. One of the objectives of the APOCP is to provide all relevant and current scientific information on the whole spectrum of cancer sciences. They aim to do this by providing a forum for communication and propagation of original and innovative research findings that have relevance to understanding the etiology, progression, treatment, and survival of patients, through their journal. The APJCP with its distinguished, diverse, and Asia-wide team of editors, reviewers, and readers, ensure the highest standards of research communication within the cancer sciences community across Asia as well as globally. The APJCP publishes original research results under the following categories: -Epidemiology, detection and screening. -Cellular research and bio-markers. -Identification of bio-targets and agents with novel mechanisms of action. -Optimal clinical use of existing anti-cancer agents, including combination therapies. -Radiation and surgery. -Palliative care. -Patient adherence, quality of life, satisfaction. -Health economic evaluations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信