cards7up
![]()
Posts:636
Sorry but this is driving me crazy. I personally had SBRT and chemo, then surgery and chemo. I had no lymph node involvement. I read many posts from people with lymph node involvement that have concurrent chemo/rads. Now I know the radiation is conventional, but is it only to the chest/lymph nodes or do they also radiate the lungs using conventional radiation? I always thought the radiation was only for the lymph nodes. So it's confusing when I read them stating they had conventional radiation to the lungs as well. Do they do this? Thank you for setting me straight. Take care, Jud
Forums
Reply # - June 25, 2015, 08:05 AM
Hi Judy,
Hi Judy,
Conventional radiation to the lungs was the old method of treating early stage lung cancer when surgery was not an option, but as Dr. Loiselle has said "patients with early stage yet medically inoperable lung cancer had fairly poor outcomes with conventional radiation therapy...With traditional techniques, the chance of locally controlling a cancer such as this was 50% at best. With SBRT, probability of locally controlling such a tumor now exceeds 90%… indeed a dramatic improvement." - http://cancergrace.org/radiation/2012/01/18/sbrt-and-optimal-candidates/
I hope that clears up the confusion.
Best,
JimC
Forum moderator
Reply # - June 25, 2015, 11:11 AM
Hi Judy,
Hi Judy,
Yes when you read the term chemo/rads the radiation is focused on the primary tumor in the lung and if lymph nodes are involved them as well.
In a post Dr. West states, "The challenge emerges out of the fact that while chemo/radiation delivered to a curative dose can on its own be curative about 20% of the time, and even comparing this strategy to one of chemo/radiation followed by surgery hasn’t shown a statistically significant improvement in survival by adding surgery." http://cancergrace.org/lung/2011/05/14/balancing-risks-of-undertreatmen…
In fact if D is cured it's because of the curative dose of radiation to his tumor concurrent with cisplatin and etoposide. His surgery wasn't curative because of the extent of the tumor. The surgeon knew that going in but needed a biopsy that eluded all other attempts. The 2 times mets were found and biopsies were inconclusive may not have be cancer...Talk about wait and see! What's your secret to living well like that.
Hope you and family are well,
Janine
Reply # - June 25, 2015, 01:59 PM
Sorry, still not clear to me.
Sorry, still not clear to me. So conventional radiation is still used in the chemo/rads concurrent on the lungs? Or is the conventional radiation for the lymph nodes only? I thought conventional radiation was no longer used on the lungs due to the damage it can cause. Take care, Judy
Reply # - June 25, 2015, 04:18 PM
Yes conventional radiation is
Yes conventional radiation is used on the lungs. When you read about 5 to 7 weeks of daily radiation that means that the it's conventional radiation. The shorter fractions ,1-4 days of treatment, to the chest are most likely stereotactic body radiation therapy or sbrt. SBRT to the lungs is a rather new approach and is still coming of age. Your question made me look around for info I could only remember bits of. I'm listening to this series Dr. Mahta made on chest radiation that may help with your understanding. http://cancergrace.org/radiation/2012/12/02/mehta-podcast-series-refine…
Reply # - June 25, 2015, 07:11 PM
So glad I had SBRT to my two
So glad I had SBRT to my two lung tumors. I never thought they used conventional radiation on the lungs only the lymph nodes. My thought process was that was a lot of radiation and possible lung loss.
Thanks for clarifying for me Janine. I get it now!
Take care, Judy