Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014 Jul 1;89(3):476-80. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.12.022.

Cobalt, linac, or other: what is the best solution for radiation therapy in developing countries?

Author information

1
Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Electronic address: bpage@wakehealth.edu.
2
Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
3
Overlook Medical Center, Summit, New Jersey.
4
Cleveland Clinic and Cleveland Clinic Lerner School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio.
5
Gamma West Cancer Services, Layton, Utah; Radiating Hope, Midvale, Utah (www.radiatinghope.org).
6
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

Abstract

The international growth of cancer and lack of available treatment is en route to become a global crisis. With >60% of cancer patients needing radiation therapy at some point during their treatment course, the lack of available facilities and treatment programs worldwide is extremely problematic. The number of deaths from treatable cancers is projected to increase to 11.5 million deaths in 2030 because the international population is aging and growing. In this review, we present how best to answer the need for radiation therapy facilities from a technical standpoint. Specifically, we examine whether cobalt teletherapy machines or megavoltage linear accelerator machines are best equipped to handle the multitudes in need of radiation therapy treatment in the developing world.

Comment in

PMID:
24929157
DOI:
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.12.022
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center