Talk:Brachytherapy

Removed?

I am wondering, does anyone know whether the radioactive seeds used in Prostate Brachytherapy remain in-situ when the rods/catheters are removed after the three or so treatments?144.137.250.17 15:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean with Interstitial HDR Prostate Brachy? They are removed - the source is attached to the end of the wire. I believe there is a seed implantation method of brachy too - my department doesn't perform that one so I don't know about that one (I'm a computer guy working in a radonc dept, so I only know what I pick up from the physicists :-) --Surturz 04:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Seeds remain in situ for prostate brachtherapy as they release a constant dose rate over time (several months) to the prostate. The half life of I-125 is around 2 months. Typically we implant maybe 100 tiny seeds per patient sometimes deep inside the prostate. They are around 4 mm long so retrieving them after they have done the job may be a little tricky! They will decay over time and present no external hazard outside the skin of the patient. HDR brachy therapy however uses much higher dose larger sources which are designed to give a dose of radiation over a much shorter time. Hope this helps.194.176.105.40 14:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

With intercavity brachy (for cervical cancer) are the seeds removed does anyone know? putting them in has been discussed but i forgot to ask about having them removed / or do they degrade naturally?

As far as I know, for cervical cancer an applicator is used to guide wired seeds from the remote afterloader to the correct place. 212.123.177.139 12:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

There are two types of treatment offered for cervical cancer, both low-dose and high-dose. In low-dose brachy the "seed(s)" usually won't stay in play for more than 72 hours. It is usually supplemented with external beam therapy (in preparation) and requires a short hospital stay. Hope that answers your question. --Ronin

I had low-dose seeds implanted in my prostate about 10 years ago. The seeds come in sets of nine seeds connected by a wire. I had 11 sets or 108 seeds implanted. The only side-effect is that I occasionally spat out a seed--often painful. Also, I have an occasional expulsion of a drop of blood every couple of months, even now. 69.121.226.166 (talk) 21:02, 5 October 2016 (UTC) Tholzel

Jeffrey Musmacher

I removed the following "There is a device that was made widely acceptable by Jeffrey Musmacher in New York that uses this applicator to successfully treat skin cancers. He has published about 8 papers on this treatment modality." I did a google search for Jeffrey Musmacher and it looks like he is indeed an oncologist but we need a reference to go with this new material. -- Ronin

I added in a blurb about Jeffrey Musmacher after I found a few references to back it up. ----Ronin103 (talk) 23:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Jargon

What is a "stat dose?" Sounds like jargon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.125.124.226 (talk) 20:55, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Spelling

I am sometimes seeing the spelling "brachytheraphy." Is this a typo? Or is it legit? Or does it have some slightly different meaning? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.13.137 (talk) 17:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Pretty sure that's a typo my friend.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Brachytherapy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:01, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   ...However, the development of remote afterloading systems ... Please explain "afterloading systems".  Done

   Well written, follows the Mos sufficiently, no infobox necessary for articles about treatments.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   One citation needed tag (Dec 2009) in the Breast cancer section needs addressing.  Done

   'Source placement': It is probably in one of the many papers already cited but I think that some form of citation for this section would be desirable.  Done

   ''In cases where the tumour is not easily accessible or is too large to ensure an optimal distribution of irradiation to the treatment area, brachytherapy can be combined with other treatments, such as EBRT and/or surgery. Combination therapy of brachytherapy exclusively with chemotherapy is rare. Can we have a citation for this?  Done

   Procedure: the first free subsections are entirely uncited.  Done

   'Electronic brachytherapy' is uncited  Done

   All sources provided appear reliable, and those that I hve been able to access support the cited statements. I assume good faith for the others.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article is thorough and well developed.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images tagged and suitably captioned.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   OK, one minor explnation needed, and some uncited passages. On hold for seven days. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:24, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

   OK, thanks for sorting that out. I formatted some bare URL references. I am happy to list this as a Good Article. Congratulations! –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

"Glioblastoma multiforme and other brain tumors" section removal

I deleted this entire section:

Glioblastoma multiforme and other brain tumors

The following extracts from a Thursday, August 4, 2011 online news release are from Richmond, Virginia, from the News Office of Virginia Polytechnical Institute and State University (Virginia Tech, whose main campus is in Blacksburg, Virginia). They concern research, using murine (mice) animal models, in brachytherapy done by Michael D. Shultz, John D. Wilson, Dr. Christine E. Fuller, Jianyuan Zhang, Harry C. Dorn, and Panos P. Fatouros at Virginia Tech and at Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) toward the relief of certain malignant brain tumors, including glioblastoma multiforme, the deadliest form of brain cancer. The research is published in the August 2011 issue of the medical journal "Radiology", ahead of print August 3 (the title is "Metallofullerene-based Nanoplatform for Brain Tumor Brachytherapy and Longitudinal Imaging in a Murine Orthotopic Xenograft Model").

"A single compound with dual function- the ability to deliver a diagnostic and therapeutic agent-may one day be used to enhance the diagnosis, imaging, and treatment of brain tumors...tumor cells often extend beyond the well-defined tumor margins making it extremely difficult for clinicians and radiologists to visualize with current imaging techniques...the study...demonstrated that a nanoparticle containing an MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) diagnostic agent can effectively be imaged within the brain tumor and provide radiation therapy in an animal model. Survival of the treated mice was 2.5 times longer than the untreated mice (52 days compared to 20.7 days). The nanoparticle filled with gadolinium, a sensitive MRI contrast agent for imaging, and coupled with radioactive lutetium 177 to deliver brachytherapy, is known as a theranostic agent- a single compound capable of delivering simultaneously effective treatment and imaging. The lutetium 177 is attached to the outside of the carbon cage of the nanoparticle. The researchers report three advances in knowledge..."

For the rest of the report, go to:

<<http://www.vtnews.vt.edu/articles/2011/08/080411-research-dornradiology.html>>

A copied and pasted press release does not belong in the list of clinical applications. Or as its own section anywhere, in fact. A write-up of brachytherapy brain cancer treatments could be a nice addition to the article, but an abridged abstract of a single paper does not a good section make. Kolbasz (talk) 19:30, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

History

The beginning of the history section is extremely poor. The claims in the first sentence are nonsensical and not supported by ref. 16 (the paper by V. Gupta). Ref. 17 was a webpage without source notes that is no longer available (except in the Internet Archive). I have added an external link to my research note on the beginnings of brachytherapy, in case anyone wants to correct this. 2003:63:C77:AF4F:141E:8DEA:48C6:F84B (talk) 14:01, 8 August 2015 (UTC) F.S. Litten

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Brachytherapy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110716105000/http://www.humonc.wisc.edu/modules/mediawiki/index.php?title=Breast_brachytherapy to http://www.humonc.wisc.edu/modules/mediawiki/index.php?title=Breast_brachytherapy

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

WP:SELFCITE

This article went through a major rewrite in 2008 by User:Rock_mc1 who disclosed on their user page that "Edits performed to the brachytherapy article on the 15th November 2009 were made with the support of Prof. F Guedea, Nucletron B.V. and other experts." and the massively cited Gerbaulet, Alain; Pötter, Richard; Mazeron, Jean-Jacques; Meertens, Harm; Limbergen, Erik Van, eds. (2002). The GEC ESTRO handbook of brachytherapy. Leuven, Belgium: European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology. ISBN 978-90-804532-6-5. ack. Jytdog (talk) 07:01, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

based on worldcat this is not a widely held book. see here. I'll be rewriting this from other sources. Jytdog (talk) 07:09, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brachytherapy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090404040935/http://www.guardian.co.uk:80/lifeandstyle/besttreatments/prostate-cancer-treatments-internal-radiotherapy-brachytherapy to http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/besttreatments/prostate-cancer-treatments-internal-radiotherapy-brachytherapy
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20091003160536/http://www.macmillan.org.uk:80/Cancerinformation/Cancertreatment/Treatmenttypes/Radiotherapy/Beingtreated/Brachytherapy.aspx to http://www.macmillan.org.uk/Cancerinformation/Cancertreatment/Treatmenttypes/Radiotherapy/Beingtreated/Brachytherapy.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:46, 6 June 2016 (UTC)