Applied radiation oncology最新文献

英文中文

Radiation-induced Syringomatous Carcinoma: A Case Report 辐射诱发的水疱瘤癌1例报告

Applied radiation oncology

Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI: 10.37549/aro1247

S. O’Neill, S. Zayed, B. Ahmad

引用次数: 0

Wernicke’s Encephalopathy Secondary to Severe Malnutrition After Definitive Chemoradiation for Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma 口咽鳞状细胞癌最终放化疗后继发于严重营养不良的韦尼克脑病

Applied radiation oncology

Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI: 10.37549/aro1242

M. Basree, Darrion Mitchell, D. Blakaj, S. Baliga, S. Jhawar, M. Gamez

引用次数: 0

Radiation Oncologist Perceptions and Utilization of Digital Patient Assessment Platforms. 放射肿瘤学家对数字患者评估平台的认识和利用。

Applied radiation oncology

Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI: 10.37549/aro1252

P. Zaki, Ganesh Shenoy, J. Gou, Vijay Raj, K. Howell

BackgroundPatient engagement is increasing in the presence of digital patient assessment platforms, or physician rating websites. Despite this rapid growth, data remains insufficient regarding how these evaluations impact radiation oncologists.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to assess radiation oncologists worldwide on their awareness and noted effects of digital patient assessment platforms.MethodsAn electronic survey was delivered to 6,199 members of the American Society of Radiation Oncology. Subjects were radiation oncologists practicing throughout the world. The survey consisted of 14 questions focused on demographics, practice details, patient volume, institutional utilization of patient reviews, and perceptions of radiation oncologists on health care reviews provided by patients.ResultsThere were 447 responses from practicing radiation oncologists in total, 321 (72%) of which are in the US. Most respondents (228; 51%) either agreed or strongly agreed that patients consider online reviews when deciding which physician to visit. Of all respondents, 188 (42%) reported that their institution checks their online feedback, whereas 157 (36%) and 99 (22%) respectively reported not knowing, or to their knowledge their institution does not check their online feedback. Respondents who saw more than the average number of consults per week were significantly more likely to receive negative feedback (P = 0.005). Forty-five percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that online virtual assessment tools contribute to physician burnout. Respondents (100; 22%) who received inappropriate or misdirected feedback were significantly more likely to report that virtual reviews contribute to burnout (P = 0.001).ConclusionsRadiation oncologists need to be aware that self-reported patient assessments are a data point in the quality of a physician and health care establishment. To best ensure appropriate feedback of a physician's capabilities as a doctor, leadership and employee alignment for patient experience are now more important than ever.

背景随着数字患者评估平台或医生评级网站的出现，患者参与度正在提高。尽管增长迅速，但关于这些评估如何影响放射肿瘤学家的数据仍然不足。目的本研究的目的是评估世界各地的放射肿瘤学家对数字患者评估平台的认识和注意到的效果。方法对6199名美国放射肿瘤学会成员进行电子调查。受试者是在世界各地执业的放射肿瘤学家。该调查由14个问题组成，重点关注人口统计、实践细节、患者数量、机构对患者审查的利用，以及放射肿瘤学家对患者提供的医疗保健审查的看法。结果共有447份来自执业放射肿瘤学家的回复，其中321份（72%）在美国。大多数受访者（228份；51%）同意或强烈同意患者在决定就诊时考虑在线审查。在所有受访者中，188人（42%）表示他们的机构会检查他们的在线反馈，而157人（36%）和99人（22%）分别表示不知道，或者据他们所知，他们的机构不会检查他们的网络反馈。每周咨询次数超过平均水平的受访者更有可能收到负面反馈（P=0.005）。45%的受访者同意或强烈同意在线虚拟评估工具会导致医生倦怠。收到不恰当或误导性反馈的受访者（100；22%）更有可能报告虚拟评论会导致倦怠（P=0.001）。结论放射肿瘤学家需要意识到，自我报告的患者评估是医生和医疗机构质量的一个数据点。为了最好地确保医生作为医生的能力得到适当的反馈，领导力和员工对患者体验的一致性现在比以往任何时候都更重要。

{"title":"Radiation Oncologist Perceptions and Utilization of Digital Patient Assessment Platforms.","authors":"P. Zaki, Ganesh Shenoy, J. Gou, Vijay Raj, K. Howell","doi":"10.37549/aro1252","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37549/aro1252","url":null,"abstract":"Background\u0000Patient engagement is increasing in the presence of digital patient assessment platforms, or physician rating websites. Despite this rapid growth, data remains insufficient regarding how these evaluations impact radiation oncologists.\u0000\u0000\u0000Objectives\u0000The purpose of this study was to assess radiation oncologists worldwide on their awareness and noted effects of digital patient assessment platforms.\u0000\u0000\u0000Methods\u0000An electronic survey was delivered to 6,199 members of the American Society of Radiation Oncology. Subjects were radiation oncologists practicing throughout the world. The survey consisted of 14 questions focused on demographics, practice details, patient volume, institutional utilization of patient reviews, and perceptions of radiation oncologists on health care reviews provided by patients.\u0000\u0000\u0000Results\u0000There were 447 responses from practicing radiation oncologists in total, 321 (72%) of which are in the US. Most respondents (228; 51%) either agreed or strongly agreed that patients consider online reviews when deciding which physician to visit. Of all respondents, 188 (42%) reported that their institution checks their online feedback, whereas 157 (36%) and 99 (22%) respectively reported not knowing, or to their knowledge their institution does not check their online feedback. Respondents who saw more than the average number of consults per week were significantly more likely to receive negative feedback (P = 0.005). Forty-five percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that online virtual assessment tools contribute to physician burnout. Respondents (100; 22%) who received inappropriate or misdirected feedback were significantly more likely to report that virtual reviews contribute to burnout (P = 0.001).\u0000\u0000\u0000Conclusions\u0000Radiation oncologists need to be aware that self-reported patient assessments are a data point in the quality of a physician and health care establishment. To best ensure appropriate feedback of a physician's capabilities as a doctor, leadership and employee alignment for patient experience are now more important than ever.","PeriodicalId":72265,"journal":{"name":"Applied radiation oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48785188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Radiation Recall Dermatitis with Docetaxel and Cyclophosphamide in a Case of Early Stage Breast Cancer Considered High Risk by Molecular Profiling 多西紫杉醇和环磷酰胺治疗早期乳腺癌的放射召回性皮炎的分子分析认为是高风险的病例

Applied radiation oncology

Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI: 10.37549/aro1241

John Paul F. Abrina, K. Baldivia

引用次数: 0

Radiation Oncologist Perceptions and Utilization of Digital Patient Assessment Platforms. 放射肿瘤学家对数字患者评估平台的认知和利用。

Applied radiation oncology

Pub Date : 2020-09-01

Peter Zaki, Ganesh Shenoy, Jiangtao Gou, Vijay Raj, Krisha Howell

Background: Patient engagement is increasing in the presence of digital patient assessment platforms, or physician rating websites. Despite this rapid growth, data remains insufficient regarding how these evaluations impact radiation oncologists.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess radiation oncologists worldwide on their awareness and noted effects of digital patient assessment platforms.

Methods: An electronic survey was delivered to 6,199 members of the American Society of Radiation Oncology. Subjects were radiation oncologists practicing throughout the world. The survey consisted of 14 questions focused on demographics, practice details, patient volume, institutional utilization of patient reviews, and perceptions of radiation oncologists on health care reviews provided by patients.

Results: There were 447 responses from practicing radiation oncologists in total, 321 (72%) of which are in the US. Most respondents (228; 51%) either agreed or strongly agreed that patients consider online reviews when deciding which physician to visit. Of all respondents, 188 (42%) reported that their institution checks their online feedback, whereas 157 (36%) and 99 (22%) respectively reported not knowing, or to their knowledge their institution does not check their online feedback. Respondents who saw more than the average number of consults per week were significantly more likely to receive negative feedback (P = 0.005). Forty-five percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that online virtual assessment tools contribute to physician burnout. Respondents (100; 22%) who received inappropriate or misdirected feedback were significantly more likely to report that virtual reviews contribute to burnout (P = 0.001).

Conclusions: Radiation oncologists need to be aware that self-reported patient assessments are a data point in the quality of a physician and health care establishment. To best ensure appropriate feedback of a physician's capabilities as a doctor, leadership and employee alignment for patient experience are now more important than ever.

背景:在数字患者评估平台或医生评级网站的存在下，患者参与度正在增加。尽管这种快速增长，关于这些评估如何影响放射肿瘤学家的数据仍然不足。目的:本研究的目的是评估全球放射肿瘤学家对数字患者评估平台的认识和注意效果。方法:对6199名美国放射肿瘤学会会员进行电子调查。研究对象是世界各地执业的放射肿瘤学家。调查包括14个问题，重点是人口统计、实践细节、患者数量、机构对患者评价的利用以及放射肿瘤学家对患者提供的医疗评价的看法。结果:共有447份来自执业放射肿瘤学家的回复，其中321份(72%)来自美国。大多数受访者(228人;51%)同意或非常同意患者在决定去看哪位医生时会考虑在线评论。在所有受访者中，188人(42%)表示他们的机构检查了他们的在线反馈，而157人(36%)和99人(22%)分别表示不知道，或者据他们所知，他们的机构没有检查他们的在线反馈。每周咨询次数超过平均次数的受访者更有可能收到负面反馈(P = 0.005)。45%的受访者同意或强烈同意在线虚拟评估工具会导致医生倦怠。受访者(100;22%)收到不恰当或误导反馈的人更有可能报告虚拟评估导致倦怠(P = 0.001)。结论:放射肿瘤学家需要意识到，自我报告的患者评估是医生和卫生保健机构质量的一个数据点。为了最好地确保医生作为医生的能力得到适当的反馈，领导和员工对患者体验的一致性现在比以往任何时候都更加重要。

{"title":"Radiation Oncologist Perceptions and Utilization of Digital Patient Assessment Platforms.","authors":"Peter Zaki, Ganesh Shenoy, Jiangtao Gou, Vijay Raj, Krisha Howell","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Patient engagement is increasing in the presence of digital patient assessment platforms, or physician rating websites. Despite this rapid growth, data remains insufficient regarding how these evaluations impact radiation oncologists.Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess radiation oncologists worldwide on their awareness and noted effects of digital patient assessment platforms.Methods: An electronic survey was delivered to 6,199 members of the American Society of Radiation Oncology. Subjects were radiation oncologists practicing throughout the world. The survey consisted of 14 questions focused on demographics, practice details, patient volume, institutional utilization of patient reviews, and perceptions of radiation oncologists on health care reviews provided by patients.Results: There were 447 responses from practicing radiation oncologists in total, 321 (72%) of which are in the US. Most respondents (228; 51%) either agreed or strongly agreed that patients consider online reviews when deciding which physician to visit. Of all respondents, 188 (42%) reported that their institution checks their online feedback, whereas 157 (36%) and 99 (22%) respectively reported not knowing, or to their knowledge their institution does not check their online feedback. Respondents who saw more than the average number of consults per week were significantly more likely to receive negative feedback (P = 0.005). Forty-five percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that online virtual assessment tools contribute to physician burnout. Respondents (100; 22%) who received inappropriate or misdirected feedback were significantly more likely to report that virtual reviews contribute to burnout (P = 0.001).Conclusions: Radiation oncologists need to be aware that self-reported patient assessments are a data point in the quality of a physician and health care establishment. To best ensure appropriate feedback of a physician's capabilities as a doctor, leadership and employee alignment for patient experience are now more important than ever.","PeriodicalId":72265,"journal":{"name":"Applied radiation oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7536100/pdf/nihms-1631422.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38461396","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Advancing Treatment for Oligometastatic Disease 推进少转移性疾病的治疗

Applied radiation oncology

Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI: 10.37549/aro1244

J. Suh

引用次数: 0

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Oligometastatic Spine Disease 立体定向身体放射治疗少转移性脊柱疾病

Applied radiation oncology

Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI: 10.37549/aro1251

M. B. Massat

30 n APPLIED RADIATION ONCOLOGY www.appliedradiationoncology.com September 2020 O disease (OMD) is an intermediate stage of cancer between an isolated tumor and widespread metastatic disease, where cancer cells from the primary tumor travel through the body/bloodstream to form a small number of clinically detectable metastatic lesions – typically less than 5 – elsewhere in the body. It is a disease state in which therapy may enable longterm disease management, much like with diabetes and heart disease, and unlike prior paradigms where metastatic disease was incurable, treatment may be potentially curative.1

30 n应用辐射肿瘤学www.APPLIED radionationoncology.com 2020年9月O病（OMD）是癌症的一个中间阶段，介于孤立肿瘤和广泛转移性疾病之间，原发肿瘤的癌症细胞穿过身体/血液，在身体其他部位形成少量临床可检测到的转移病灶，通常不到5个。这是一种疾病状态，在这种状态下，治疗可以实现长期的疾病管理，就像糖尿病和心脏病一样，与以前转移性疾病无法治愈的模式不同，治疗可能具有潜在的疗效。1

引用次数: 0

Transcriptional Mechanisms of Radioresistance and Therapeutic Implications 放射抵抗的转录机制及其治疗意义

Applied radiation oncology

Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI: 10.37549/aro1246

Daniel Y. Kim, Jimmy A. Guo, Daniel Zhao, E. Philip, Y. R. Li

引用次数: 0

Brachytherapy for Resistant Disseminated Superficial Actinic Porokeratosis 耐药弥漫性浅浅光化性角化孔症的近距离治疗

Applied radiation oncology

Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI: 10.37549/aro1250

Josee Smith, S. Narla, A. Lyons, I. Kohli, F. Siddiqui, B. Rao, Lori Penman, I. Hamzavi

引用次数: 1

Management of Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer. 癌症少转移前列腺癌的治疗。

Applied radiation oncology

Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI: 10.37549/aro1243

J. Broughman, C. Fleming, O. Mian, K. Stephans, R. Tendulkar

Metastatic prostate cancer has long been considered incurable and managed with systemic therapies alone. However, there is increasing evidence of an “oligometastatic” state where patients with low-volume metastatic disease may achieve sustained disease-free intervals as well as potentially improved overall survival (OS) with combinations of systemic and local therapy. The concept of oligometastatic disease was first described by Hellman and Weichselbaum who hypothesized that there may be an intermediate state between locally confined disease and fulminant metastatic disease.1 Accordingly, recent data suggests that aggressive treatment of the primary tumor or metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) may confer a survival advantage in carefully selected patients with metastatic prostate cancer.2-4 Among the 190,000 new cases of prostate cancer diagnosed each year in the US, about 20% present with primary metastatic disease.5,6 Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and imaging advances have led to a relative increase in the detection of cases with early metastatic disease. Even after detection of distant metastases (DM), metastatic prostate cancer is relatively indolent and marked by a long disease course.7 Due to its long natural history, prostate cancer has been at the forefront of efforts investigating aggressive treatment in oligometastatic disease. In this review we aim to outline treatment approaches for these patients, while highlighting existing literature, ongoing trials, and important areas for future study.

转移性前列腺癌症长期以来一直被认为是不可治愈的，只能通过全身治疗进行治疗。然而，越来越多的证据表明存在“少转移”状态，即低容量转移性疾病的患者可以通过全身和局部治疗的组合实现持续的无病间隔，并可能提高总生存率（OS）。Hellman和Weichselbaum首先描述了寡转移性疾病的概念，他们假设局部局限性疾病和暴发性转移性疾病之间可能存在中间状态。1因此，最近的数据表明，对原发肿瘤的积极治疗或转移导向治疗（MDT）可能会为精心选择的转移性前列腺癌患者带来生存优势。2.4在美国每年诊断的19万例新前列腺癌症病例中，约20%的患者患有原发性转移性疾病。5，6前列腺特异性抗原（PSA）筛查和成像的进步导致早期转移性疾病病例的检测相对增加。即使在检测到远处转移（DM）后，转移性前列腺癌症也相对无痛，且病程较长。7由于其悠久的自然病史，癌症前列腺癌一直处于研究侵袭性治疗少转移疾病的最前沿。在这篇综述中，我们旨在概述这些患者的治疗方法，同时强调现有文献、正在进行的试验和未来研究的重要领域。

{"title":"Management of Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer.","authors":"J. Broughman, C. Fleming, O. Mian, K. Stephans, R. Tendulkar","doi":"10.37549/aro1243","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37549/aro1243","url":null,"abstract":"Metastatic prostate cancer has long been considered incurable and managed with systemic therapies alone. However, there is increasing evidence of an “oligometastatic” state where patients with low-volume metastatic disease may achieve sustained disease-free intervals as well as potentially improved overall survival (OS) with combinations of systemic and local therapy. The concept of oligometastatic disease was first described by Hellman and Weichselbaum who hypothesized that there may be an intermediate state between locally confined disease and fulminant metastatic disease.1 Accordingly, recent data suggests that aggressive treatment of the primary tumor or metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) may confer a survival advantage in carefully selected patients with metastatic prostate cancer.2-4 Among the 190,000 new cases of prostate cancer diagnosed each year in the US, about 20% present with primary metastatic disease.5,6 Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and imaging advances have led to a relative increase in the detection of cases with early metastatic disease. Even after detection of distant metastases (DM), metastatic prostate cancer is relatively indolent and marked by a long disease course.7 Due to its long natural history, prostate cancer has been at the forefront of efforts investigating aggressive treatment in oligometastatic disease. In this review we aim to outline treatment approaches for these patients, while highlighting existing literature, ongoing trials, and important areas for future study.","PeriodicalId":72265,"journal":{"name":"Applied radiation oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46735474","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 8

首页上一页

类型

全部化学•材料生命科学医学物理工程技术环境•农林材料科学地球科学法学管理学化学环境科学与生态学计算机科学教育学经济学农林科学人文科学生物学数学物理与天体物理心理学综合性期刊其他工业工程理学历史学农学文学信息工程

数据库

全部 ACS Publications Elsevier ieeexplore Springer The Royal Society of Chemistry Wiley

期刊

Applied radiation oncology

全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.

﹀