Jonathan B Wallach, Sheetal Malhotra, Steve P Lee, Lori Hoffman-Hogg, Ronald Shapiro, Gabriela Wechsler, Katherine Faricy-Anderson, Mary C McGunigal, Maria D Kelly, Ruchika Gutt
{"title":"放射和医学肿瘤学在少转移性疾病治疗中的应用。","authors":"Jonathan B Wallach, Sheetal Malhotra, Steve P Lee, Lori Hoffman-Hogg, Ronald Shapiro, Gabriela Wechsler, Katherine Faricy-Anderson, Mary C McGunigal, Maria D Kelly, Ruchika Gutt","doi":"10.12788/fp.0603","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recent phase 2 randomized clinical trials support the use of aggressive local treatment in addition to systemic therapy for oligometastatic disease (OMD) to improve progression-free survival and overall survival. These studies have mostly incorporated stereotactic body radiotherapy and serve as the foundation for multiple phase 3 trials aiming to determine how many metastases comprehensive local radiotherapy (RT) offer survival benefits, and for which cancers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To understand clinician views on the role of local RT for OMD, a 12-question survey was developed that included case examples. The survey was distributed to Veterans Health Administration (VHA) radiation oncologists and medical oncologists.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 106 survey respondents, 59 (55.7%) were radiation oncologists and 47 (44.3%) were medical oncologists. All respondents indicated high-dose RT has potential benefits for appropriately selected cases. Most oncologists (88.7%) responded that RT for OMD contributes to cure (88.1% radiation oncologists, 89.4% medical oncologists; <i>P</i> = .84). More than half (52.9%) of respondents (55.2% radiation oncologists, 50.0% medical oncologists; <i>P</i> = .60) indicated that local RT for OMD should not be limited by histology. Most radiation oncologists classified ≤ 5 lesions as OMD, whereas most medical oncologists classified ≤ 3 lesions as OMD (<i>P</i> = .006). Thirty-six medical oncologists (76.6%) has a radiation oncology department at their institution. This subgroup was more likely to consider local RT as potentially curative than peers without radiation oncology at their institution (94.4% vs 72.7%; <i>P</i> = .04). Management differences in the 3 oligometastatic cases were also identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of this study highlight ongoing support among VHA oncologists for local RT in the management of OMD and reveal specialty-based and access-based variability in treatment perspectives.</p>","PeriodicalId":94009,"journal":{"name":"Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS","volume":"42 Suppl3","pages":"S3-S8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12494332/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Radiation and Medical Oncology Perspectives on Oligometastatic Disease Treatment.\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan B Wallach, Sheetal Malhotra, Steve P Lee, Lori Hoffman-Hogg, Ronald Shapiro, Gabriela Wechsler, Katherine Faricy-Anderson, Mary C McGunigal, Maria D Kelly, Ruchika Gutt\",\"doi\":\"10.12788/fp.0603\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recent phase 2 randomized clinical trials support the use of aggressive local treatment in addition to systemic therapy for oligometastatic disease (OMD) to improve progression-free survival and overall survival. These studies have mostly incorporated stereotactic body radiotherapy and serve as the foundation for multiple phase 3 trials aiming to determine how many metastases comprehensive local radiotherapy (RT) offer survival benefits, and for which cancers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To understand clinician views on the role of local RT for OMD, a 12-question survey was developed that included case examples. The survey was distributed to Veterans Health Administration (VHA) radiation oncologists and medical oncologists.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 106 survey respondents, 59 (55.7%) were radiation oncologists and 47 (44.3%) were medical oncologists. All respondents indicated high-dose RT has potential benefits for appropriately selected cases. Most oncologists (88.7%) responded that RT for OMD contributes to cure (88.1% radiation oncologists, 89.4% medical oncologists; <i>P</i> = .84). More than half (52.9%) of respondents (55.2% radiation oncologists, 50.0% medical oncologists; <i>P</i> = .60) indicated that local RT for OMD should not be limited by histology. Most radiation oncologists classified ≤ 5 lesions as OMD, whereas most medical oncologists classified ≤ 3 lesions as OMD (<i>P</i> = .006). Thirty-six medical oncologists (76.6%) has a radiation oncology department at their institution. This subgroup was more likely to consider local RT as potentially curative than peers without radiation oncology at their institution (94.4% vs 72.7%; <i>P</i> = .04). Management differences in the 3 oligometastatic cases were also identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of this study highlight ongoing support among VHA oncologists for local RT in the management of OMD and reveal specialty-based and access-based variability in treatment perspectives.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94009,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS\",\"volume\":\"42 Suppl3\",\"pages\":\"S3-S8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12494332/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12788/fp.0603\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12788/fp.0603","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:最近的2期随机临床试验支持在对寡转移性疾病(OMD)进行全身治疗的基础上,采用积极的局部治疗来改善无进展生存期和总生存期。这些研究大多纳入了立体定向体放疗,并作为多个3期试验的基础,旨在确定有多少转移性局部综合放疗(RT)提供生存益处,以及针对哪些癌症。方法:为了解临床医生对局部放疗在OMD中的作用的看法,我们开展了一项包括病例在内的12个问题的调查。该调查被分发给退伍军人健康管理局(VHA)的放射肿瘤学家和医学肿瘤学家。结果:106名调查对象中,放射肿瘤学家59人(55.7%),内科肿瘤学家47人(44.3%)。所有应答者都表示,高剂量放射治疗对适当选择的病例有潜在的益处。大多数肿瘤学家(88.7%)认为放射肿瘤学家(88.1%)和内科肿瘤学家(89.4%)认为放射治疗有助于治愈OMD。超过一半(52.9%)的受访者(放射肿瘤学家55.2%,内科肿瘤学家50.0%,P = 0.60)认为局部放射治疗不应受组织学限制。大多数放射肿瘤学家将≤5个病变归为OMD,而大多数内科肿瘤学家将≤3个病变归为OMD (P = 0.006)。36名肿瘤科医生(76.6%)在其所在机构设有放射肿瘤科。该亚组更有可能认为局部放疗比其所在机构未进行放射肿瘤学治疗的同龄人具有潜在的疗效(94.4% vs 72.7%; P = 0.04)。3例低转移病例的治疗差异也被确定。结论:本研究的结果突出了VHA肿瘤学家对局部RT治疗OMD的持续支持,并揭示了治疗角度基于专科和基于可及性的差异。
Radiation and Medical Oncology Perspectives on Oligometastatic Disease Treatment.
Background: Recent phase 2 randomized clinical trials support the use of aggressive local treatment in addition to systemic therapy for oligometastatic disease (OMD) to improve progression-free survival and overall survival. These studies have mostly incorporated stereotactic body radiotherapy and serve as the foundation for multiple phase 3 trials aiming to determine how many metastases comprehensive local radiotherapy (RT) offer survival benefits, and for which cancers.
Methods: To understand clinician views on the role of local RT for OMD, a 12-question survey was developed that included case examples. The survey was distributed to Veterans Health Administration (VHA) radiation oncologists and medical oncologists.
Results: Of 106 survey respondents, 59 (55.7%) were radiation oncologists and 47 (44.3%) were medical oncologists. All respondents indicated high-dose RT has potential benefits for appropriately selected cases. Most oncologists (88.7%) responded that RT for OMD contributes to cure (88.1% radiation oncologists, 89.4% medical oncologists; P = .84). More than half (52.9%) of respondents (55.2% radiation oncologists, 50.0% medical oncologists; P = .60) indicated that local RT for OMD should not be limited by histology. Most radiation oncologists classified ≤ 5 lesions as OMD, whereas most medical oncologists classified ≤ 3 lesions as OMD (P = .006). Thirty-six medical oncologists (76.6%) has a radiation oncology department at their institution. This subgroup was more likely to consider local RT as potentially curative than peers without radiation oncology at their institution (94.4% vs 72.7%; P = .04). Management differences in the 3 oligometastatic cases were also identified.
Conclusions: The results of this study highlight ongoing support among VHA oncologists for local RT in the management of OMD and reveal specialty-based and access-based variability in treatment perspectives.