Asare Augustine Amoafo, Diederick Willem De Boo, Matthew William Lukies
Interventional Radiology (IR) is a relatively young specialty that has experienced rapid development since Charles Dotter performed the first percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in 1964. Since then, IR has expanded to include a diverse array of minimally invasive image-guided procedures. It was the same Charles Dotter who early on recognized that the Interventional Radiologist must be involved in patient care as a true clinician, not just a skilled mechanic. However, outpatient and periprocedural clinical patient management by IR has remained underdeveloped when compared to the significant procedural advancements seen over the past four decades. We present local Australian health service data reinforcing the value of formal outpatient clinics in delivering adequate patient counselling, improving consent rates prior to the procedure day, and decreasing costly day-of-procedure cancellations and reschedulling.
{"title":"Formal Outpatient Clinics in Interventional Radiology: An Essential Component of Modern Practice","authors":"Asare Augustine Amoafo, Diederick Willem De Boo, Matthew William Lukies","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.70028","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1754-9485.70028","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Interventional Radiology (IR) is a relatively young specialty that has experienced rapid development since Charles Dotter performed the first percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in 1964. Since then, IR has expanded to include a diverse array of minimally invasive image-guided procedures. It was the same Charles Dotter who early on recognized that the Interventional Radiologist must be involved in patient care as a true clinician, not just a skilled mechanic. However, outpatient and periprocedural clinical patient management by IR has remained underdeveloped when compared to the significant procedural advancements seen over the past four decades. We present local Australian health service data reinforcing the value of formal outpatient clinics in delivering adequate patient counselling, improving consent rates prior to the procedure day, and decreasing costly day-of-procedure cancellations and reschedulling.</p>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"69 8","pages":"825-828"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1754-9485.70028","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145186163","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jack Edward Liu, Lisa Milner, Behnam Shaygi, Michael Stewart, Anousha Yazdabadi, Julian Maingard, Hong Kuan Kok, Numan Kutaiba, Christen D. Barras, Paul Maria Parizel, Hamed Asadi
Introduction
While gender disparities in the radiology workforce are well-documented, there has been no analysis of outcomes for competitive awards in Australia and New Zealand. As formal recognition is critical for career progression, this study aimed to investigate gender-based differences in application and success rates for grants, prizes and educational fellowships within the Australasian context.
Methods
We retrospectively reviewed applications for Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists' (RANZCR) Faculty of Clinical Radiology grants, prizes and educational fellowships from 2011 to 2024. Application and success rates were stratified by gender and compared to College membership demographics. Significance was assessed using Fisher's exact test.
Results
Across 333 total applications, 227 (68.2%) were from males and 106 (31.8%) from females, closely reflecting College membership gender ratios (69.2% male vs. 30.8% female). No significant gender disparity was found in the success rates for grants (40.3% for males vs. 35.0% for females, p = 0.58), prizes (8.8% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.08) or educational fellowships (36.7% vs. 32.1%, p = 0.32). Application rates for each award type also broadly reflected the gender composition of the College membership.
Conclusion
This study is the first to examine gender differences in clinical radiology grant, prize and educational fellowship outcomes in Australia and New Zealand. We found no significant disparities in success rates, and application rates generally mirrored College membership, suggesting the award process itself is equitable. However, the continued underrepresentation of women in radiology underscores the need to examine broader structural and sociocultural factors that may impact engagement with competitive academic opportunities.
{"title":"Gender-Based Outcomes in Grants, Prizes and Fellowship Success Rates in Clinical Radiology: A 14-Year Review of Outcomes in Australia and New Zealand","authors":"Jack Edward Liu, Lisa Milner, Behnam Shaygi, Michael Stewart, Anousha Yazdabadi, Julian Maingard, Hong Kuan Kok, Numan Kutaiba, Christen D. Barras, Paul Maria Parizel, Hamed Asadi","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.70019","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1754-9485.70019","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>While gender disparities in the radiology workforce are well-documented, there has been no analysis of outcomes for competitive awards in Australia and New Zealand. As formal recognition is critical for career progression, this study aimed to investigate gender-based differences in application and success rates for grants, prizes and educational fellowships within the Australasian context.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We retrospectively reviewed applications for Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists' (RANZCR) Faculty of Clinical Radiology grants, prizes and educational fellowships from 2011 to 2024. Application and success rates were stratified by gender and compared to College membership demographics. Significance was assessed using Fisher's exact test.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Across 333 total applications, 227 (68.2%) were from males and 106 (31.8%) from females, closely reflecting College membership gender ratios (69.2% male vs. 30.8% female). No significant gender disparity was found in the success rates for grants (40.3% for males vs. 35.0% for females, <i>p</i> = 0.58), prizes (8.8% vs. 11.1%, <i>p</i> = 0.08) or educational fellowships (36.7% vs. 32.1%, <i>p</i> = 0.32). Application rates for each award type also broadly reflected the gender composition of the College membership.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study is the first to examine gender differences in clinical radiology grant, prize and educational fellowship outcomes in Australia and New Zealand. We found no significant disparities in success rates, and application rates generally mirrored College membership, suggesting the award process itself is equitable. However, the continued underrepresentation of women in radiology underscores the need to examine broader structural and sociocultural factors that may impact engagement with competitive academic opportunities.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"69 8","pages":"798-803"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145130996","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Anneka Parker, Patrick Horsley, Helen Wheeler, Venkatesha Venkatesha, Marina Kastelan, Brendan Liu, Michael Back
Introduction
Decision-making for adjuvant therapy regimen of elderly patients with glioblastoma may be based on age alone rather than prognostic factors. This study assesses treatment outcomes for elderly patients with good prognostic factors managed with the EORTC-NCIC Protocol.
Methods
Patients treated for glioblastoma with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in accordance with the EORTC-NCIC (Stupp) Protocol between 2008 and 2021 were entered into a prospective database. Outcomes for patients aged < 65 were compared to those ≥ 65 years, divided into subgroups 65–70, 70–74 and > 75 years. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were the primary and secondary endpoints, respectively.
Results
The study included 437 patients, of whom 319 were aged < 65 and 118 were aged ≥ 65 years. Median OS was 19.2 months for patients aged < 65 years and 15.0 months for those aged ≥ 65 years (p = 0.006). Median PFS were 12.0 and 11.3 months, respectively (p = 0.119). For both age groups, performance status, extent of resection and MGMT methylation were significant predictors of overall survival. Age group was not a significant predictor of OS when these factors were accounted for (p = 0.237).
Conclusion
When stratified for performance status and MGMT methylation, elderly patients had similar outcomes compared with the younger cohort. This suggests that elderly patients who managed well following diagnosis and subsequent surgical procedure may be optimally treated with long-course standard rather than elderly protocols.
{"title":"Elderly Patients With Glioblastoma and Good Prognostic Factors May Achieve Equivalent Median Survival to Younger Patients When Managed With Standard Long-Course Rather Than Elderly Protocols","authors":"Anneka Parker, Patrick Horsley, Helen Wheeler, Venkatesha Venkatesha, Marina Kastelan, Brendan Liu, Michael Back","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.70020","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1754-9485.70020","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Decision-making for adjuvant therapy regimen of elderly patients with glioblastoma may be based on age alone rather than prognostic factors. This study assesses treatment outcomes for elderly patients with good prognostic factors managed with the EORTC-NCIC Protocol.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Patients treated for glioblastoma with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in accordance with the EORTC-NCIC (Stupp) Protocol between 2008 and 2021 were entered into a prospective database. Outcomes for patients aged < 65 were compared to those ≥ 65 years, divided into subgroups 65–70, 70–74 and > 75 years. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were the primary and secondary endpoints, respectively.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The study included 437 patients, of whom 319 were aged < 65 and 118 were aged ≥ 65 years. Median OS was 19.2 months for patients aged < 65 years and 15.0 months for those aged ≥ 65 years (<i>p</i> = 0.006). Median PFS were 12.0 and 11.3 months, respectively (<i>p</i> = 0.119). For both age groups, performance status, extent of resection and MGMT methylation were significant predictors of overall survival. Age group was not a significant predictor of OS when these factors were accounted for (<i>p</i> = 0.237).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>When stratified for performance status and MGMT methylation, elderly patients had similar outcomes compared with the younger cohort. This suggests that elderly patients who managed well following diagnosis and subsequent surgical procedure may be optimally treated with long-course standard rather than elderly protocols.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"69 8","pages":"844-851"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145086195","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Breast conserving surgery for non-palpable tumours requires imaging-guided localisation, historically achieved with hookwire localisation (HWL). HWL, however, has recognised shortcomings including the need for same-day surgery with associated radiology resource/logistical constraints, psychological impact of wire protrusion, and complications such as wire displacement or fracture. The introduction of novel non-wire surgical marker navigation (SMN) techniques offers promising benefits. This study evaluates the early implementation of SMN (Sirius Pintuition and Merit SAVISCOUT systems) in one radiology department in Auckland, New Zealand.
Methods
This is a retrospective cohort study evaluating surgical outcomes in patients with non-palpable tumours who underwent preoperative localisation between May 2023 and June 2024. Three groups were compared: two cohorts who underwent SMN in the form of Pintution (n = 36) and SAVISCOUT (n = 42) and one who underwent HWL (n = 35). Surgical outcomes assessed included histological margin status and rates of re-excision. Technical challenges and complications were recorded.
Results
There was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between HWL and SMN groups. The ‘surgery complete’ rate was 89% in the HWL group, 82% in the Pintuition group, and 97% in the SAVISCOUT group (p = 0.10). Technique failure occurred in five cases of SMN (6%) due to inadequate seed position and one case of HWL (3%) due to wire displacement.
Conclusion
SMN in the form of Pintuition and SAVISCOUT demonstrate comparable surgical outcomes to HWL, whilst also offering advantages in scheduling flexibility and resource utilisation. A small rate of technical failure highlights the operator learning curve and need for appropriate training.
{"title":"Navigating New Frontiers: Initial Auckland Experience of Seed Localisation Techniques for Breast Conserving Surgery","authors":"Yousr Al-Sheibani, Andrew MacDonald, Kaye Wang","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.70024","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1754-9485.70024","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Breast conserving surgery for non-palpable tumours requires imaging-guided localisation, historically achieved with hookwire localisation (HWL). HWL, however, has recognised shortcomings including the need for same-day surgery with associated radiology resource/logistical constraints, psychological impact of wire protrusion, and complications such as wire displacement or fracture. The introduction of novel non-wire surgical marker navigation (SMN) techniques offers promising benefits. This study evaluates the early implementation of SMN (Sirius Pintuition and Merit SAVISCOUT systems) in one radiology department in Auckland, New Zealand.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This is a retrospective cohort study evaluating surgical outcomes in patients with non-palpable tumours who underwent preoperative localisation between May 2023 and June 2024. Three groups were compared: two cohorts who underwent SMN in the form of Pintution (<i>n</i> = 36) and SAVISCOUT (<i>n</i> = 42) and one who underwent HWL (<i>n</i> = 35). Surgical outcomes assessed included histological margin status and rates of re-excision. Technical challenges and complications were recorded.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>There was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between HWL and SMN groups. The ‘surgery complete’ rate was 89% in the HWL group, 82% in the Pintuition group, and 97% in the SAVISCOUT group (<i>p</i> = 0.10). Technique failure occurred in five cases of SMN (6%) due to inadequate seed position and one case of HWL (3%) due to wire displacement.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>SMN in the form of Pintuition and SAVISCOUT demonstrate comparable surgical outcomes to HWL, whilst also offering advantages in scheduling flexibility and resource utilisation. A small rate of technical failure highlights the operator learning curve and need for appropriate training.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"69 8","pages":"790-797"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145081000","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ye Jin Yoo, Youngmoon Goh, Hanyong Kim, Jin-hong Park
Introduction
This study aimed to assess pelvic organ motion and volume changes during long-course radiation therapy (LCRT) for anorectal cancer and propose an optimal planning target volume (PTV) margin.
Method
This retrospective study analysed 526 daily cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) from 22 patients with anorectal cancer undergoing LCRT. Patients followed a bladder-filling protocol by drinking water before treatment. The bladder, rectum and mesorectum were delineated on planning CT and CBCTs. PTV margins were calculated using the van Herk formula, and margins to cover 95% interfractional motion were also evaluated.
Results
Bladder volume exhibited the higher variability (mean ± standard deviations, 271.3 ± 130.5 mL), compared to the mesorectum (111.3 ± 26.2 mL) and rectum (50.6 ± 15.6 mL). Mesorectum motion showed no significant correlation with bladder volume changes but was significantly associated with rectal volume (r = 0.566; p < 0.001 in the superior mesorectum). Anterior mesorectum motion was larger compared to other directions, particularly in the superior region, with systematic and random variations of 4.4 and 3.5 mm. Using the van Herk formula, PTV margins for the anterior mesorectum were 5.8, 4.9, and 3.3 mm for the superior, middle and inferior regions, respectively. Similarly, margins to cover 95% interfractional movement extended up to 6.7 mm in the superior–anterior region.
Conclusion
Bladder volume varied significantly during LCRT, while mesorectum motion was influenced by rectal volume changes. A 5-mm PTV margin was sufficient for the mid to lower mesorectum, with a larger 7-mm margin needed for the superior–anterior mesorectum. Incorporating 95% interfractional motion coverage further refined these margin recommendations.
{"title":"Quantifying Interfractional Motion in Patients With Anorectal Cancer During Radiotherapy and Recommendations of Optimal Planning Target Volume Margins","authors":"Ye Jin Yoo, Youngmoon Goh, Hanyong Kim, Jin-hong Park","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.70022","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1754-9485.70022","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study aimed to assess pelvic organ motion and volume changes during long-course radiation therapy (LCRT) for anorectal cancer and propose an optimal planning target volume (PTV) margin.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Method</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This retrospective study analysed 526 daily cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) from 22 patients with anorectal cancer undergoing LCRT. Patients followed a bladder-filling protocol by drinking water before treatment. The bladder, rectum and mesorectum were delineated on planning CT and CBCTs. PTV margins were calculated using the van Herk formula, and margins to cover 95% interfractional motion were also evaluated.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Bladder volume exhibited the higher variability (mean ± standard deviations, 271.3 ± 130.5 mL), compared to the mesorectum (111.3 ± 26.2 mL) and rectum (50.6 ± 15.6 mL). Mesorectum motion showed no significant correlation with bladder volume changes but was significantly associated with rectal volume (<i>r</i> = 0.566; <i>p</i> < 0.001 in the superior mesorectum). Anterior mesorectum motion was larger compared to other directions, particularly in the superior region, with systematic and random variations of 4.4 and 3.5 mm. Using the van Herk formula, PTV margins for the anterior mesorectum were 5.8, 4.9, and 3.3 mm for the superior, middle and inferior regions, respectively. Similarly, margins to cover 95% interfractional movement extended up to 6.7 mm in the superior–anterior region.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Bladder volume varied significantly during LCRT, while mesorectum motion was influenced by rectal volume changes. A 5-mm PTV margin was sufficient for the mid to lower mesorectum, with a larger 7-mm margin needed for the superior–anterior mesorectum. Incorporating 95% interfractional motion coverage further refined these margin recommendations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"69 7","pages":"707-714"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145075420","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Meegan Shepherd, Kenton Thompson, Trent Aland, Jeremy Booth, Jeremiah de Leon, Cathy Hargrave, Michael G. Jameson, Sweet Ping Ng, Amy Yuen Meei Teh, Nigel Anderson
This paper details the current state of Online Adaptive Radiation Therapy (oART) in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) and identifies the need for best practice guidelines for ANZ. This paper has been formulated by a working party formed as a branch of the Radiation Oncology Alliance (ROA), which is the peak group comprising the organisations that represent the four key professions in radiation oncology—the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR), the Australasian College of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Medicine (ACPSEM), the Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy (ASMIRT) and the Cancer Nurses Society of Australia (CNSA). The ROA Adaptive Radiation Therapy working party consists of membership from RANZCR, ACPSEM and ASMIRT.
{"title":"Adapting to the Future: Introducing the Radiation Oncology Alliance Adaptive Radiotherapy Working Group","authors":"Meegan Shepherd, Kenton Thompson, Trent Aland, Jeremy Booth, Jeremiah de Leon, Cathy Hargrave, Michael G. Jameson, Sweet Ping Ng, Amy Yuen Meei Teh, Nigel Anderson","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.70023","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1754-9485.70023","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper details the current state of Online Adaptive Radiation Therapy (oART) in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) and identifies the need for best practice guidelines for ANZ. This paper has been formulated by a working party formed as a branch of the Radiation Oncology Alliance (ROA), which is the peak group comprising the organisations that represent the four key professions in radiation oncology—the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR), the Australasian College of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Medicine (ACPSEM), the Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy (ASMIRT) and the Cancer Nurses Society of Australia (CNSA). The ROA Adaptive Radiation Therapy working party consists of membership from RANZCR, ACPSEM and ASMIRT.</p>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"69 7","pages":"763-767"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1754-9485.70023","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145069788","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Editorial—A Response to Chronic External Research Underfunding: The Radiation Oncology Large Research Grant(s)","authors":"Daniel E. Roos","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.70021","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1754-9485.70021","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"69 7","pages":"747-748"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145064778","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
P. Herst, M. van Schalkwyk, N. Baker, et al. “Mepitel Film Versus StrataXRT in Managing Radiation Dermatitis in an Intra-Patient Controlled Clinical Trial of 80 Postmastectomy Patients,” Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology 69, no. 4 (2025): 440–446, https://doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13850.
Details of the Correction:
In the originally published version of this article, the article was incorrectly categorised as “Medical Imaging”. However, upon a recent review and reclassification of its primary content, the article type has been determined to align more accurately with “Radiation Oncology”.
We apologize for this error.
P. Herst， M. van Schalkwyk， N. Baker，等。“在80例乳腺切除术后患者的患者内部对照临床试验中，Mepitel膜与StrataXRT治疗放射性皮炎”，医学影像与放射肿瘤学杂志，第69期。4 (2025): 440-446, https://doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13850.Details的更正：在本文最初发布的版本中，该文章被错误地归类为“医学成像”。然而，根据最近对其主要内容的审查和重新分类，文章类型已确定更准确地与“放射肿瘤学”保持一致。我们为这个错误道歉。
{"title":"Correction to “Mepitel Film Versus StrataXRT in Managing Radiation Dermatitis in an Intra-Patient Controlled Clinical Trial of 80 Postmastectomy Patients”","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.70017","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1754-9485.70017","url":null,"abstract":"<p>P. Herst, M. van Schalkwyk, N. Baker, et al. “Mepitel Film Versus StrataXRT in Managing Radiation Dermatitis in an Intra-Patient Controlled Clinical Trial of 80 Postmastectomy Patients,” Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology 69, no. 4 (2025): 440–446, https://doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13850.</p><p>Details of the Correction:</p><p>In the originally published version of this article, the article was incorrectly categorised as “Medical Imaging”. However, upon a recent review and reclassification of its primary content, the article type has been determined to align more accurately with “Radiation Oncology”.</p><p>We apologize for this error.</p>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"69 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1754-9485.70017","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145015533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"ChatGPT's Methodological Perspectives on Information Quality in Interventional Radiology","authors":"Deniz Esin Tekcan Sanli, Ahmet Necati Sanli","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.70018","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1754-9485.70018","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"69 7","pages":"745-746"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144957294","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Kimberley Budgen, Danica Cossio, Danny R. Youlden, Nathan Dunn, Suzanne Poulgrain, Katharine Cuff, Margaret McGrath, Andrew Pullar, Matthew C. Foote, Rumal Jayalath, Julie Moore, Mark B. Pinkham
Introduction
Glioblastoma management in elderly patients is challenging. The aim of this study was to review oncological treatment strategies at a single institution from 2011 to 2020.
Methods
Patients aged ≥ 70 years who received radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy for radiological or histological glioblastoma were identified from a centralised database. Patients receiving supportive care only were excluded, whether or not they had surgery at diagnosis. Clinicopathologic data and treatment modalities were collected. Median survival from diagnosis was calculated by the Kaplan–Meier method.
Results
Seventy-eight people were identified during the study period, median age 74.5 years (range 70–88). Seventy-five people had surgery (24 biopsy only, and 51 resection) and three people had radiological diagnosis only. The most common first-line treatment was concurrent chemoradiation (33/78, 42%). Only 18/33 (55%) went on to receive adjuvant temozolomide, median of five cycles (interquartile range [IQR] 2–6). The most common radiotherapy dose was 40 Gy in 15 fractions (52/73, 71%) and 60 Gy in 30 fractions was less frequently prescribed over time. Second-line therapy for recurrent or progressive disease was received in 23% overall, and varied in modality. Median survival was 7.0 months (IQR 4.4–12.5), and 6.4% (CI 4.3%–9.1%) at 2 years.
Conclusion
Survival is poor for elderly patients with glioblastoma despite treatment. Concurrent chemoradiation was the most common treatment strategy, and 40 Gy in 15 fractions was the most common radiotherapy schedule. A small proportion of people received treatment for recurrent disease, and modality varied greatly.
{"title":"Management of Glioblastoma in Elderly Patients in a Single Australian Centre","authors":"Kimberley Budgen, Danica Cossio, Danny R. Youlden, Nathan Dunn, Suzanne Poulgrain, Katharine Cuff, Margaret McGrath, Andrew Pullar, Matthew C. Foote, Rumal Jayalath, Julie Moore, Mark B. Pinkham","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.70010","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1754-9485.70010","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Glioblastoma management in elderly patients is challenging. The aim of this study was to review oncological treatment strategies at a single institution from 2011 to 2020.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Patients aged ≥ 70 years who received radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy for radiological or histological glioblastoma were identified from a centralised database. Patients receiving supportive care only were excluded, whether or not they had surgery at diagnosis. Clinicopathologic data and treatment modalities were collected. Median survival from diagnosis was calculated by the Kaplan–Meier method.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Seventy-eight people were identified during the study period, median age 74.5 years (range 70–88). Seventy-five people had surgery (24 biopsy only, and 51 resection) and three people had radiological diagnosis only. The most common first-line treatment was concurrent chemoradiation (33/78, 42%). Only 18/33 (55%) went on to receive adjuvant temozolomide, median of five cycles (interquartile range [IQR] 2–6). The most common radiotherapy dose was 40 Gy in 15 fractions (52/73, 71%) and 60 Gy in 30 fractions was less frequently prescribed over time. Second-line therapy for recurrent or progressive disease was received in 23% overall, and varied in modality. Median survival was 7.0 months (IQR 4.4–12.5), and 6.4% (CI 4.3%–9.1%) at 2 years.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Survival is poor for elderly patients with glioblastoma despite treatment. Concurrent chemoradiation was the most common treatment strategy, and 40 Gy in 15 fractions was the most common radiotherapy schedule. A small proportion of people received treatment for recurrent disease, and modality varied greatly.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"69 7","pages":"757-762"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144957329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号