@AaronGoodman33 The former is far more cruel. Giving a patient false hope by putting them through that kind of brutal surgery, for a disease with that high metastatic rate, is honestly shocking
@5_utr The best way radonc can reduce toxicity in prostate cancer treatment isn’t fx, protons, MRI linac etc… it’s getting more patients to choose radiation vs surgery
@toddscarbrough@WinshipAtEmory@TheLancetOncol I dont understand how a local therapy could have this magnitude benefit in stage IV pts. But if it does, should we evaluate other local options for these pts?
@DrChowdharyMD @evicorehc I’ve had many denials where they want 2D for bone mets, which is ridiculous since we routinely do CT, generate 3D plans and evaluate normal organ doses
@toddscarbrough This is very carefully presented— they walk a very fine line here saying “current data do not support improved outcomes”… which is true!
@yuanjamesrao Interestingly, this group found excellent 10-yr outcomes with 27/2 even in a single implant in 1 day. There’s a lot to learn about the radbio of hypo fx RT.
https://t.co/0MPXNwvVpJ
@drbeckta@MayoRadOnc Perhaps question but how can we have a proton fractionation RCT before a simple proton vs photon? It would not take large numbers or a long time for toxicity data and would be very useful info
@ParikhSimul @NiuSanford Reading this article I’m struck by the toxicity in BOTH groups relative to photon experience.
RCT is so long overdue; in the meantime I don’t know how anyone can feel good about treating these patients off trial
@drbeckta@dschan02@lemmiwenks@_podiatry@toddscarbrough It raises the question of how many patients should justify having a center so those patients wouldn’t have to drive. Seems like the only way for a 5-6 patient/day machine to succeed would be remote doc/physics/dosi and/or greatly increasing rural reimbursement per pt