Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Delayed initiation of radiotherapy for glioblastoma: how important is it to push to the front (or the back) of the line?
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Delayed initiation of radiotherapy for glioblastoma: how important is it to push to the front (or the back) of the line?
Do you wish to request the book?
Delayed initiation of radiotherapy for glioblastoma: how important is it to push to the front (or the back) of the line?
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Delayed initiation of radiotherapy for glioblastoma: how important is it to push to the front (or the back) of the line?
2011
Overview
Glioblastoma is a malignant tumor characterized by a rapid proliferation rate. Contemporary multi-modality treatment consists of maximal surgical resection followed by radiation therapy (RT) combined with cytotoxic chemotherapy. The optimal timing of these different steps is not known. Four studies from the pre-temozolomide era, encompassing a total of 4,584 subjects, have examined the consequences of a delay between resection and starting RT. Whereas the two small single-institution studies found this delay to be detrimental, two large multi-institutional studies found delay to be either slightly beneficial or at least not harmful. Here, we critically compare the methodologies and results presented in these studies, and include a novel analysis of the combined datasets. We conclude that moderate wait periods (up to 4–6 weeks post-operatively) are safe and may be modestly beneficial. Conversely, there is no evidence to justify waiting longer than 6 weeks. Underlying radiobiological principles are discussed.
Publisher
Springer US,Springer Nature B.V
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.