New Method in Radiation

The Toronto Star had yet another 8 page section on Prostate Cancer and I
am pointing you to the first article which is about our rad onc, Dr.
Andrew Loblaw and a refined method he is using.

Ron was part of his study 5 years ago, which was a precursor to this, I
imagine. Alan Meyer had the same sort of HDR treatment.

http://www.healthzone.ca/health/article/436504

On the right of this page are other articles from this Prostate section
and also some information on HIFU which is done at private clinics in
Toronto.

Just thought some of you might be interested. Young Andrew is doing
really well and is now head of Clinical Trials, etc. He previously
worked at our other large cancer hospital, Princess Margaret.

I would not hesitate to say that we got VERY lucky when Ron was sent to
Sunnybrook for routine radiation treatment and we got Dr. Loblaw as our
rad onc. He is not only brilliant, but funny as well and puts anyone at
ease.

To any Canadians reading this and wondering.....yes, he is related. (G)

Heather (and Ron)

On Jun 6, 9:27*am, "Heather" <no....@home.invalid> wrote:
> The Toronto Star had yet another 8 page section on Prostate Cancer and I
> am pointing you to the first article which is about our rad onc, Dr.
> Andrew Loblaw and a refined method he is using.
>
> Ron was part of his study 5 years ago, which was a precursor to this, I
> imagine. *Alan Meyer had the same sort of HDR treatment.
>
> http://www.healthzone.ca/health/article/436504
>
> On the right of this page are other articles from this Prostate section
> and also some information on HIFU which is done at private clinics in
> Toronto.
>
> Just thought some of you might be interested. *Young Andrew is doing
> really well and is now head of Clinical Trials, etc. *He previously
> worked at our other large cancer hospital, Princess Margaret.
>
> I would not hesitate to say that we got VERY lucky when Ron was sent to
> Sunnybrook for routine radiation treatment and we got Dr. Loblaw as our
> rad onc. *He is not only brilliant, but funny as well and puts anyone at
> ease.
>
> To any Canadians reading this and wondering.....yes, he is related. *(G)
>
> Heather (and Ron)

How is this different then, say, Proton Beam?

On Jun 9, 3:13 pm, Dick Smith <smith_bp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> ...
> How is this different then, say, Proton Beam?

I believe the article is describing an x-ray therapy.

X-rays are electromagnetic waves, like radio waves or light
beams.

Protons are positively charged nuclear particles, a totally
different thing.

Proton beams have a specially valuable property for cancer
treatment. It's possible, by accelerating the protons to a
very precise speed, to cause them to deposit almost all
of their energy in a very narrow section of tissue. In theory,
they do very little harm to the healthy tissue in front of the
tumor or the healthy tissue behind it. X-rays go through
all of that tissue and do damage to all of it.

The main problem with proton therapy is the astronomical
cost of the equipment, which translates to high treatment
costs. However more centers are opening and the costs
may come down somewhat.

As far as effectiveness is concerned. The theory is that
proton beam treatment will be just as effective but with
fewer side effects. However we don't have as many trials
yet as we have with x-rays in order to be absolutely sure.

Alan

Thanks, Alan.....our daughter just arrived for 2 weeks holiday, so
didn't have time to research this as thoroughly as you did. But I will
say one thing, we don't have proton therapy all that much (if at all) up
here. And I did ask our rad onc about it way back when and it was not
really in favour at that time.

My impression of proton is that it works better on the lower Gleason/PSA
cancers, whereas Dr. Loblaw's evolved treatment works on more advanced
as well. And I got that impression from reading the article. But I am
more than a tad biased I will admit. He is an amazing researcher!!

Back to making jewellery (grin)......it is thunderstorming like mad and
I just came up here to shut this down.

Best.....Heather and the crew.

"Alan Meyer" <ameyer2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5906a4ec-a10a-47f5-98e5-5b7a6e2ef93c@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 9, 3:13 pm, Dick Smith <smith_bp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> ...
>> How is this different then, say, Proton Beam?
>
> I believe the article is describing an x-ray therapy.
>
> X-rays are electromagnetic waves, like radio waves or light
> beams.
>
> Protons are positively charged nuclear particles, a totally
> different thing.
>
> Proton beams have a specially valuable property for cancer
> treatment. It's possible, by accelerating the protons to a
> very precise speed, to cause them to deposit almost all
> of their energy in a very narrow section of tissue. In theory,
> they do very little harm to the healthy tissue in front of the
> tumor or the healthy tissue behind it. X-rays go through
> all of that tissue and do damage to all of it.
>
> The main problem with proton therapy is the astronomical
> cost of the equipment, which translates to high treatment
> costs. However more centers are opening and the costs
> may come down somewhat.
>
> As far as effectiveness is concerned. The theory is that
> proton beam treatment will be just as effective but with
> fewer side effects. However we don't have as many trials
> yet as we have with x-rays in order to be absolutely sure.
>
> Alan

"Heather" <no.one@home.invalid> wrote in message
news:g2kmt2$77f$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> ...
> My impression of proton is that it works better on the lower
> Gleason/PSA cancers, whereas Dr. Loblaw's evolved treatment
> works on more advanced as well. And I got that impression from
> reading the article.
> ...

I don't know what to think about proton therapy. In theory, it
should have a lower incidence of side effects on surrounding
tissue, though the latest x-ray techniques also keep getting
better and better at limiting dosage to sensitive areas.

IIRC, there is a person on the Yahoo prostate cancer group who
mortgaged his house in order to get proton therapy because his
insurance company wouldn't pay for it and he believed it was
superior to the surgery or radiation his insurance would pay for.

To the best of my knowledge, there is no hard evidence that it's
more effective than radiation or surgery and, again to the best
of my knowledge, the proton practitioners don't claim that it is.
Yet quite a few people have become almost hysterical about its
merits, believing that they'll die of cancer if they don't
somehow come up with the money to pay for it.

So if an elderly gentleman approaches you on the street, pulls a
gun, and demands cash for his proton therapy, give him whatever
you've got. He may be desperate enough to do anything.

Alan

On Jun 9, 6:25*pm, Alan Meyer <amey...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 9, 3:13 pm, Dick Smith <smith_bp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > ...
> > How is this different then, say, Proton Beam?
>
> I believe the article is describing an x-ray therapy.
>
> X-rays are electromagnetic waves, like radio waves or light
> beams.
>
> Protons are positively charged nuclear particles, a totally
> different thing.
>
> Proton beams have a specially valuable property for cancer
> treatment. *It's possible, by accelerating the protons to a
> very precise speed, to cause them to deposit almost all
> of their energy in a very narrow section of tissue. *In theory,
> they do very little harm to the healthy tissue in front of the
> tumor or the healthy tissue behind it. *X-rays go through
> all of that tissue and do damage to all of it.
>
> The main problem with proton therapy is the astronomical
> cost of the equipment, which translates to high treatment
> costs. *However more centers are opening and the costs
> may come down somewhat.
>
> As far as effectiveness is concerned. *The theory is that
> proton beam treatment will be just as effective but with
> fewer side effects. *However we don't have as many trials
> yet as we have with x-rays in order to be absolutely sure.
>
> * * Alan

I found this one:
http://www.jkpix.com/TenYearStudy/Te...ar%20Study.pdf
But honestly don't know how to interpret the data.

On Jun 9, 11:13 am, Dick Smith <smith_bp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 6, 9:27 am, "Heather" <no....@home.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The Toronto Star had yet another 8 page section on Prostate Cancer and I
> > am pointing you to the first article which is about our rad onc, Dr.
> > Andrew Loblaw and a refined method he is using.
>
> > Ron was part of his study 5 years ago, which was a precursor to this, I
> > imagine. Alan Meyer had the same sort of HDR treatment.
>
> >http://www.healthzone.ca/health/article/436504
>
> > On the right of this page are other articles from this Prostate section
> > and also some information on HIFU which is done at private clinics in
> > Toronto.
>
> > Just thought some of you might be interested. Young Andrew is doing
> > really well and is now head of Clinical Trials, etc. He previously
> > worked at our other large cancer hospital, Princess Margaret.
>
> > I would not hesitate to say that we got VERY lucky when Ron was sent to
> > Sunnybrook for routine radiation treatment and we got Dr. Loblaw as our
> > rad onc. He is not only brilliant, but funny as well and puts anyone at
> > ease.
>
> > To any Canadians reading this and wondering.....yes, he is related. (G)
>
> > Heather (and Ron)
>
> How is this different then, say, Proton Beam?

The Sunnybrook treatment is just an improved IMRT radiation - the
linear accelerator use in external beam radiation. The improvement is
better tracking of the prostate location (apparently using CT scan)
and the higher session dose but coming from many more directions than
even IMRT (in 2003, it had up to 5 directions). While it targets the
prostate location better and permits higher doses, it is no smarter
knowing where the cancer cells are located that what is given by the
usual biopsy. Fine for early cancers but of little help for any cancer
that may have spread outside the prostate. More information is
available at http://www.tomotherapy.com/

Protean bean is a totally different radiation particle.

Lud

On June 10, Lud replied to Heather:

> The Sunnybrook treatment is just an improved IMRT radiation - the
> linear accelerator use in external beam radiation. The improvement is
> better tracking of the prostate location (apparently using CT scan)

Tomotherapy (a trade marked name) aka image-guided RT (IGRT).

Before each radiation session, a CT (aka CAT, computerized axial
tomography) scan is performed in order to determine with certainty the
precise position of the organ to be treated on that day and at that hour.

(snip)

> but coming from many more directions than
> even IMRT (in 2003, it had up to 5 directions).

Tomotherapy/IGRT radiation comes from 360 degrees. IMRT comes, as Lud
said, from 5 directions, roughly 200 degrees from side to side. It's
called "step and shoot."

> While it targets the
> prostate location better and permits higher doses, it is no smarter
> knowing where the cancer cells are located that what is given by the
> usual biopsy.

Well, it's a treatment, not a diagnostic tool. It is no better than the
information fed into it. Per the computer GIGO (garbage in, garbage out)
law.

> Fine for early cancers but of little help for any cancer
> that may have spread outside the prostate. More information is
> available at http://www.tomotherapy.com/
>
> Protean bean is a totally different radiation particle.

Um, I think Lud means *proton* beam. Bad fingers, no?

"Lud" <LudwickP@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c721abcb-9bf9-4e58-93c3-70e1d4d03d0c@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

> The Sunnybrook treatment is just an improved IMRT radiation - the
> linear accelerator use in external beam radiation. The improvement is
> better tracking of the prostate location (apparently using CT scan)
> and the higher session dose but coming from many more directions than
> even IMRT (in 2003, it had up to 5 directions). While it targets the
> prostate location better and permits higher doses, it is no smarter
> knowing where the cancer cells are located that what is given by the
> usual biopsy. Fine for early cancers but of little help for any cancer
> that may have spread outside the prostate. More information is
> available at http://www.tomotherapy.com/
>
> Protean bean is a totally different radiation particle.
>
Lud......it is late and I am incredibly tired.....long day out in the
country.

Ron had two sessions of *HDR* radiation first. That is 18 needles
directly in the prostate gland and the radioactive material is only in
there for about 6 or 8 minutes. But it takes a lot of plotting and
planning via CT scan, etc before they actually do it. We were there for
6 hours each time.

Alan Meyer had the same treatment over 3 days....and I believe he also
had regular radiation, as did Ron. Ron only had 25 IMRT treatments, I
believe. Have to check my notes. But certainlly way less than 42.

Heather (and if I don't make sense, I will sort it out later.....leaving
early again tomorrow for a day in T.O.)

"Heather" <no.one@home.invalid> wrote in message
news:g2nm29$62u$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> Heather (and if I don't make sense, I will sort it out later)

How much later? It's been going on for years. :-)

"Steve Kramer" <skramer@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message
news:484f9917$0$4262$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> "Heather" <no.one@home.invalid> wrote in message
> news:g2nm29$62u$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>
>> Heather (and if I don't make sense, I will sort it out later)
>
> How much later? It's been going on for years. :-)

ROFL!! What would I do without your wingy sense of humour, pussy cat.

Just got back from a wonderful day in Toronto with Ron and Elayne. We
went to see the musical/stage play "Dirty Dancing".......it was
amazing!! There was a blonde in it that would make even YOU sit up and
take notice!! Legs up to her *earlobes*. (G)

Kissies.....from my cat, perhaps.
>
>
>
>

On Jun 10, 6:05 pm, Steve Jordan <mycrofts...@cox.net> wrote:
> On June 10, Lud replied to Heather:
>
> > The Sunnybrook treatment is just an improved IMRT radiation - the
> > linear accelerator use in external beam radiation. The improvement is
> > better tracking of the prostate location (apparently using CT scan)
>
> Tomotherapy (a trade marked name) aka image-guided RT (IGRT).
>
> Before each radiation session, a CT (aka CAT, computerized axial
> tomography) scan is performed in order to determine with certainty the
> precise position of the organ to be treated on that day and at that hour.
>
> (snip)
>
> > but coming from many more directions than
> > even IMRT (in 2003, it had up to 5 directions).
>
> Tomotherapy/IGRT radiation comes from 360 degrees. IMRT comes, as Lud
> said, from 5 directions, roughly 200 degrees from side to side. It's
> called "step and shoot."
>
> > While it targets the
> > prostate location better and permits higher doses, it is no smarter
> > knowing where the cancer cells are located that what is given by the
> > usual biopsy.
>
> Well, it's a treatment, not a diagnostic tool. It is no better than the
> information fed into it. Per the computer GIGO (garbage in, garbage out)
> law.
>
> > Fine for early cancers but of little help for any cancer
> > that may have spread outside the prostate. More information is
> > available athttp://www.tomotherapy.com/
>
> > Protean bean is a totally different radiation particle.
>
> Um, I think Lud means *proton* beam. Bad fingers, no?

CyberKnife is more interesting than Tomotherapy as the beams can be
programed to come from any direction (spherical field) and cause even
less damage. Sadly the treatment is only as good as the targeting of
actual cancer cells - hopefully this will be the next improvement.

(Watching my fingers so I can't vouch for the quality of the info)
Lud

On Jun 11, 4:58 am, "Heather" <no....@home.invalid> wrote:
> ...
> Alan Meyer had the same treatment over 3 days....and I believe he also
> had regular radiation, as did Ron. Ron only had 25 IMRT treatments, I
> believe. Have to check my notes. But certainlly way less than 42.
> ...

Mine was two HDR sessions.

The plan was, one HDR session, 25 3DCRT sessions, one more HDR.

As it happened, the exigencies of scheduling caused me to get the
last several 3DCRT sessions after the second HDR.

That was all four years ago. So far, so good (knock on wood.)

Alan