1
|
Koide Y, Shindo Y, Nagai N, Kitagawa T, Aoyama T, Shimizu H, Hashimoto S, Tachibana H, Kodaira T. Classification of Patients With Painful Tumors to Predict Response to Palliative Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 120:79-88. [PMID: 38493900 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.03.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2023] [Revised: 02/22/2024] [Accepted: 03/07/2024] [Indexed: 03/19/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aimed to identify factors affecting pain response to develop a patient classification system for palliative radiation therapy (RT). METHODS AND MATERIALS Our prospective observational study (UMIN000044984) provided data on patients who received palliative RT for painful tumors. The eligibility criteria were having a numerical rating scale (NRS) score of 2 or more before treatment and receiving palliative RT between August 2021 and September 2022. Post-RT follow-up was scheduled prospectively at 2, 4, 12, 24, 36, and 52 weeks. Pain response was assessed using the International Consensus Pain Response Endpoints criteria, with the primary outcome being the response rate within 12 weeks. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors affecting pain response and develop the classification system. Each class evaluated the differences in response rate, time to response, and progression. RESULTS Of the 488 registered lesions, 366 from 261 patients met the criteria. Most patients had bone metastases (75%), of whom 72% were using opioids and 22% underwent reirradiation. Conventional RT (eg, 8-Gy single fraction, 20 Gy in 5 fractions) was administered to 93% of patients. Over a median of 6.8 months of follow-up, the average NRS decreased from 6.1 to 3.4 at 12 weeks for 273 evaluable lesions, with a 60% response rate. Opioid use and reirradiation negatively affected the response rate in multivariate analysis (P < .01). Lesions were categorized into class 1 (no opioid use and no reirradiation; 89 lesions), class 2 (neither class 1 nor 3; 211 lesions), and class 3 (opioid use and reirradiation; 66 lesions), with respective response rates of 75%, 61%, and 36% (P < .001). Time to response was similar across the classes (P = .91), but the progression rates at 24 weeks differed (11%, 27%, and 63%, respectively; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS Opioid use and reirradiation are factors leading to significant variations in pain response rates and time to progression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yutaro Koide
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan.
| | - Yurika Shindo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Naoya Nagai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Tomoki Kitagawa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Takahiro Aoyama
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Hidetoshi Shimizu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Shingo Hashimoto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Hiroyuki Tachibana
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Takeshi Kodaira
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lawrence YR, Miszczyk M, Dawson LA, Diaz Pardo DA, Aguiar A, Limon D, Pfeffer RM, Buckstein M, Barry AS, Meron T, Dicker AP, Wydmański J, Zimmermann C, Margalit O, Hausner D, Morag O, Golan T, Jacobson G, Dubinski S, Stanescu T, Fluss R, Freedman LS, Ben-Ayun M, Symon Z. Celiac plexus radiosurgery for pain management in advanced cancer: a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2024; 25:1070-1079. [PMID: 39029483 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00223-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2023] [Revised: 04/18/2024] [Accepted: 04/19/2024] [Indexed: 07/21/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Refractory upper abdominal pain or lower back pain (retroperitoneal pain syndrome) related to celiac plexus involvement characterises pancreatic and other upper gastrointestinal malignancies and is an unmet need. We hypothesised that ablative radiation delivered to the celiac plexus would decrease pain. METHODS This multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study was done at eight hospitals in five countries (Israel, Poland, Canada, the USA, and Portugal). Eligible patients aged 18 years or older with an average pain level of 5-10 on the Brief Pain Inventory short form (BPI-SF), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-2, and either pancreatic cancer or other tumours involving the celiac axis, received a single fraction of 25 Gy of external-beam photons to the celiac plexus. The primary endpoint was complete or partial pain response based on a reduction of the BPI-SF average pain score of 2 points or more from baseline to 3 weeks after treatment. All evaluable patients with stable pain scores were included in response assessment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03323489, and is complete. FINDINGS Between Jan 3, 2018, and Dec 28, 2021, 125 patients were treated, 90 of whom were evaluable. Patients were followed up until death. Median age was 65·5 years (IQR 58·3-71·8), 50 (56%) were female and 40 (44%) were male, 83 (92%) had pancreatic cancer, and 77 (86%) had metastatic disease. Median baseline BPI-SF average pain score was 6 (IQR 5-7). Of the 90 evaluable patients at 3 weeks, 48 (53%; 95% CI 42-64) had at least a partial pain response. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events, irrespective of attribution, were abdominal pain (35 [28%] of 125) and fatigue (23 [18%]). 11 serious adverse events of grade 3 or worse were recorded. Two grade 3 serious adverse events were probably attributed to treatment by the local investigators (abdominal pain [n=1] and nausea [n=1]), and nine were possibly attributed to treatment (seven were grade 3: blood bilirubin increased [n=1], duodenal haemorrhage [n=2], abdominal pain [n=2], and progressive disease [n=2]; and two were grade 5: gastrointestinal bleed from suspected varices 24 days after treatment [n=1] and progressive disease [advanced pancreatic cancer] 89 days after treatment [n=1]). INTERPRETATION Celiac plexus radiosurgery could potentially be a non-invasive palliative option for patients with retroperitoneal pain syndrome. Further investigation by means of a randomised comparison with conventional celiac block or neurolysis is warranted. FUNDING Gateway for Cancer Research and the Israel Cancer Association.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yaacov R Lawrence
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel; School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel; Department of Radiation Oncology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - Marcin Miszczyk
- III Department of Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice, Poland; Collegium Medicum, Faculty of Medicine, WSB University, Dąbrowa Górnicza, Poland
| | - Laura A Dawson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Margaret Hospital Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | - Artur Aguiar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Instituto Português de Oncologia, Porto, Portugal
| | - Dror Limon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikvah, Israel
| | - Raphael M Pfeffer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Assuta Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Michael Buckstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Aisling S Barry
- Cancer Research @UCC, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland; Department of Radiation Oncology, Cork University Hospital, Cork, Ireland
| | - Tikva Meron
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel
| | - Adam P Dicker
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jerzy Wydmański
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice, Poland
| | - Camilla Zimmermann
- Department of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Hospital Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Ofer Margalit
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel; School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - David Hausner
- Department of Palliative Care, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel; School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Ofir Morag
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel; School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Talia Golan
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel; School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Galia Jacobson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikvah, Israel
| | - Sergey Dubinski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel
| | - Teo Stanescu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Margaret Hospital Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Ronen Fluss
- The Biostatistics and Biomathematics Unit, The Gertner Institute for Health Policy and Epidemiology, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel
| | - Laurence S Freedman
- The Biostatistics and Biomathematics Unit, The Gertner Institute for Health Policy and Epidemiology, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel
| | - Maoz Ben-Ayun
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel
| | - Zvi Symon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel; School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bianchi SP, Faccenda V, Pacifico P, Parma G, Saufi S, Ferrario F, Belmonte M, Sala L, De Ponti E, Panizza D, Arcangeli S. Short-term pain control after palliative radiotherapy for uncomplicated bone metastases: a prospective cohort study. Med Oncol 2023; 41:13. [PMID: 38079079 DOI: 10.1007/s12032-023-02238-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2023] [Accepted: 11/04/2023] [Indexed: 12/18/2023]
Abstract
This study aimed at evaluating the efficacy of different radiotherapy (RT) fractionation regimens in managing uncomplicated painful bone metastases (BM) and identifying predictive factors for pain control. Patients with 1 to 4 symptomatic BM from any primary solid tumors and a life expectancy exceeding 3 months were included in the study and received palliative RT, with SBRT restricted in the context of oligometastatic disease or in patients with good prognosis. Pain analysis using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) tool was conducted at baseline, 1 and 3 months after RT. Analgesic intake was recorded as morphine-equivalent doses (OME). Pain response was assessed using the International Consensus on Palliative Radiotherapy Endpoint (ICPRE). Multivariate logistic regression analyzed patient-related, tumor-related, and treatment-related factors predicting BM pain control at 3 months post-RT. From Feb 2022 to Feb 2023, 44 patients with 65 symptomatic BM were investigated. Breast (32%) and lung (24%) tumors were the most common primary tumors. Treatment plans included 3DCRT (60%) and VMAT (40%), with a median biological effective dose for tumors (BED) of 29 Gy [14-108]. All patients completed the 3-month follow-up. Pain response rates were 62% at 1 month and 60% at 3 months. Responders had better PS ECOG scores (67%; P = 0.008) and received active systemic therapies (67%: P = 0.036). Non-responders had lower pretreatment BPI (mean: 13.7 vs. 58.2; P = 0.032), with significantly higher values after 1 month (mean: 9.1 vs. 5.3, P = 0.033). Baseline BPI (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.032-1.327; P = 0.014) and BPI at 1 month (OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.698-0.976; P = 0.025) were independent predictors of pain response at 3 months. Our findings show that palliative RT ensured short-term pain control in patients with BM, regardless of tumor type and dose-fractionation regimen. A larger sample size and a longer follow-up could potentially identify which patients are likely to benefit most from RT, and which fractionation might be indicated for achieving a durable pain relief. A multidisciplinary approach is paramount to provide a better care to BM patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sofia Paola Bianchi
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy
- Radiation Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo Dei Tintori, Monza, Italy
| | - Valeria Faccenda
- Medical Physics Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo Dei Tintori, Monza, Italy
| | - Pietro Pacifico
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy
- Radiation Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo Dei Tintori, Monza, Italy
| | - Gaia Parma
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy
- Radiation Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo Dei Tintori, Monza, Italy
| | - Sara Saufi
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy
- Radiation Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo Dei Tintori, Monza, Italy
| | - Federica Ferrario
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy
- Radiation Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo Dei Tintori, Monza, Italy
| | - Maria Belmonte
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy
- Radiation Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo Dei Tintori, Monza, Italy
| | - Luca Sala
- Clinical Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo Dei Tintori, Monza, Italy
| | - Elena De Ponti
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy
- Medical Physics Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo Dei Tintori, Monza, Italy
| | - Denis Panizza
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy
- Medical Physics Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo Dei Tintori, Monza, Italy
| | - Stefano Arcangeli
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
- Radiation Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo Dei Tintori, Monza, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Tseng YD. Radiation Therapy for Painful Bone Metastases: Fractionation, Recalcification, and Symptom Control. Semin Radiat Oncol 2023; 33:139-147. [PMID: 36990631 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2022.11.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/29/2023]
Abstract
Bone is a common site for metastases, which may cause pain and other skeletal-related events (SRE) in patients with advanced cancer. Since the 1980s, prospective clinical trials have demonstrated the high efficacy of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for pain relief from focal, symptomatic lesions. In uncomplicated bone metastases, which include those without pathologic fracture, evidence of cord compression, or prior surgical intervention, improvement or complete pain relief with radiotherapy is as high as 60%, with no difference in efficacy when radiotherapy is delivered in a single or multiple fractions. The ability to treat with a single fraction makes EBRT an attractive therapy even for patients with poor performance status and/or life expectancy. Even in patients with complicated bone metastases (eg cord compression), several randomized trials have demonstrated similar rates of pain relief in addition to improved functional outcomes such as ambulation. In this review, we summarize the role of EBRT for alleviating painful bone metastases and explore its role for other endpoints including functional outcomes, recalcification, and prevention of SREs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yolanda D Tseng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutch Cancer Center, Seattle, WA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Pain Response Rates After Conventional Radiation Therapy for Bone Metastases Assessed Using International Consensus Pain Response Endpoints: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Initial Radiation Therapy and Reirradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023:S0360-3016(23)00099-8. [PMID: 36736920 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.01.050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2022] [Revised: 12/20/2022] [Accepted: 01/21/2023] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
Previous meta-analysis of conventional radiation therapy for painful bone metastases showed overall response (OR) rates of 72% to 75% (evaluable patients), 61% to 62% (intent-to-treat patients) for initial radiation therapy, and 68% for reirradiation (evaluable patients). However, the definition of pain response differed among the studies included. Hence, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the pain response rates assessed by the International Consensus Pain Response Endpoints (ICPRE) for both initial radiation therapy and reirradiation. The PubMed and Scopus databases were searched for articles published between 2002 and 2021. The inclusion criteria were (1) prospective studies or studies based on prospectively collected data and (2) studies in which pain response was assessed using ICPRE. Our primary outcomes of interest were the OR rates (sum of the complete and partial response rates) for both initial radiation therapy and reirradiation. Of the 6470 articles identified in our database search, 32 and 3 met the inclusion criteria for the analysis of initial radiation therapy and reirradiation, respectively. The OR rates of initial radiation therapy in evaluable patients (n = 4775) and intent-to-treat patients (n = 6775) were 60.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55.2-65.4) and 45.4% (95% CI, 38.7-52.4), respectively. The OR rates of reirradiation in evaluable patients (n = 733) and intent-to-treat patients (n = 1085) were 70.8% (95% CI, 15.7-96.9) and 62.2% (95% CI, 5.3-98.0), respectively. Subgroup analyses of initial radiation therapy including the comparison of randomized and nonrandomized studies showed no significant differences in any comparison, indicating similar response rates across different study designs. For initial radiation therapy, we determined the ICPRE-assessed response rates, which were lower than previously reported. The OR and complete response rates should be benchmarks for future randomized and nonrandomized studies. For reirradiation, the wide CIs demonstrate that the response rates based on ICPRE require further investigation.
Collapse
|
6
|
Saito T, Yamaguchi K, Toya R, Oya N. Single- Versus Multiple-Fraction Radiation Therapy for Painful Bone Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Nonrandomized Studies. Adv Radiat Oncol 2019; 4:706-715. [PMID: 31673664 PMCID: PMC6817531 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2019.06.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2019] [Revised: 06/12/2019] [Accepted: 06/20/2019] [Indexed: 01/24/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Single-fraction radiation therapy (RT) is a convenient and cost-effective regimen for the palliation of painful bone metastases, but is still underused. Randomized controlled trials comparing single- versus multiple-fraction RT are limited by generalizability. We compared the pain response rates after single- versus multiple-fraction RT in nonrandomized studies. METHODS AND MATERIALS We searched PubMed and Scopus from the inception of each database through August 2018. We sought to identify nonrandomized studies in which data on pain response rates could be extracted for single- and multiple-fraction RT. Our primary outcomes of interest were the overall and complete pain response rates in evaluable patients. The analysis was performed using a random-effects model with the Mantel-Haenszel method. RESULTS Of the 3933 articles identified through our search, 9 met our inclusion criteria. Five of 9 included studies did not exclude patients with features of complicated bone metastases. A 1 × 8 Gy radiation schedule was frequently used in single-fraction therapy, and schedules of 5 × 4 Gy and 10 × 3 Gy were frequently used in multiple-fraction therapy. In the 9 studies, the overall response rate was 67% (884 of 1321 patients) for patients in the single-fraction arm and 70% (953 of 1360 patients) for those in the multiple-fraction arm (pooled odds ratio [OR]: 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-1.08). In 5 studies, the complete response rate was 26% (195 of 753 patients) for patients in the single-fraction arm and 35% (289 of 821 patients) for those in the multiple-fraction arm (pooled OR: 0.89; 95% CI, 0.70-1.13). CONCLUSIONS There were no significant differences in the overall and complete response rates between single- and multiple-fraction RT. The effectiveness of single-fraction regimens was shown in nonrandomized settings, which better reflect daily practice than randomized studies. The CIs for the pooled ORs included clinically meaningful differences, and the study results are inconclusive.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tetsuo Saito
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Saito T, Toya R, Oya N. Pain Response Rates After Conventional Radiation Therapy for Bone Metastases in Prospective Nonrandomized Studies: A Systematic Review. Pract Radiat Oncol 2018; 9:81-88. [PMID: 30508601 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2018.11.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2018] [Revised: 11/13/2018] [Accepted: 11/16/2018] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aimed to determine the pain response rates after conventional radiation therapy (RT) for painful bone metastases in prospective nonrandomized studies, which better reflect daily practice than randomized controlled trials. METHODS AND MATERIALS A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus for articles published between 2002 and 2018. We only included articles in which pain response after RT was assessed using the International Consensus Endpoint initially published in 2002, or the updated version from 2012. In addition, to be included in this review, the study design was required to be prospective or based on prospectively collected data. Our primary outcomes of interest were the overall and complete response rates after conventional RT for bone metastases. RESULTS Of the 2863 articles identified in our database search, 12 met the inclusion criteria. Six studies excluded patients with features of complicated bone metastases. Only 2 papers reported exclusion criteria regarding analgesic use. Radiation schedules that were frequently used were 1 × 8 Gy, 5 × 4 Gy, and 10 × 3 Gy. The overall response rate in evaluable patients was 55%, and 754 of the 1379 evaluable patients experienced a complete or partial response. The complete response rate was 15% (196 of 1348 evaluable patients). In the intent-to-treat patient group, the overall response rate was 29% (754 of 2559 enrolled patients), and the complete response rate 8% (196 of 2528 enrolled patients). CONCLUSIONS We determined the pain response rates after conventional RT for painful bone metastases in prospective nonrandomized studies. The present review may provide benchmarks for future nonrandomized studies that investigate palliative RT for bone metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tetsuo Saito
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan.
| | - Ryo Toya
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
| | - Natsuo Oya
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
| |
Collapse
|