Investment in proton beam therapy for cancer may be premature

April 18, 2012

Both the US and UK are pouring money into building proton accelerators to treat cancer. They have been described as the world's "most costly medical devices" but in an article published in the British Medical Journal today, journalist Keith Epstein reports that "no clear evidence of better effectiveness exists" and asks whether the investment is premature.

Proton beam treatment is thought to target more precisely than conventional radiation, minimising harm to healthy tissue while reducing side effects and increasing cure rates. It has been shown to be beneficial and cost effective for children with cancer and for some rare brain cancers.

The US has invested millions of dollars in 10 centres, and 19 more are being built. While in the UK, the recently announced that the NHS is to spend up to £250m on two centres despite no appraisal by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE).

But proton beam therapy, especially in the US, is now being marketed as a treatment for prostate cancer where, not only is the benefit unclear but, in some cases, the side effects appear to be no better than conventional radio therapy, reports Epstein.

In fact, signs that proton beam therapy is less cost effective than conventional radiation for prostate cancer have been increasingly evident since 2007, he adds.

Earlier this year, Professor Ezekiel Emanuel, an oncologist at the University of Pennsylvania and former adviser to President Obama described proton beam therapy as "crazy medicine and unsustainable public policy."

He said: "If the United States is ever going to control its healthcare costs, we have to demand better evidence of effectiveness and stop handing out taxpayer dollars with no questions asked."

Yet the first randomised controlled trials comparing x rays with proton beams is only just about to begin and won't be completed for seven years.

Harvard Medical School radiation oncologist Anthony Zietman told the BMJ: "We rush into treatments before they are proved" and suggests that, "in some instances, proton therapy might be inferior to existing treatments."

Robert Foote, a radiation oncologist at the Mayo Clinic is also worried that some centres are adopting the proton beam therapy before enough research has been done and, possibly, for the wrong indications.

Related Stories

Proton therapy effective prostate cancer treatment

January 5, 2012

Proton therapy, a type of external beam radiation therapy, is a safe and effective treatment for prostate cancer, according to two new studies published in the January issue of the International Journal of Radiation Oncology•Biology•Physics ...

Recommended for you

New treatment options for a fatal leukemia

July 27, 2015

In industrialized countries like in Europe, acute lymphoblastic leukemia is the most common form of cancer in children. An international research consortium lead by pediatric oncologists from the Universities of Zurich and ...

Exciting results from cancer immunoagent study

July 20, 2015

(Medical Xpress)—Cancer therapies have improved incrementally over the years, but cancer treatment largely remains analogous to forest fire suppression, in which the spread of fire is contained with deliberate controlled ...

Lymphomas tied to metabolic disruption

July 17, 2015

Researchers from the School of Medicine at The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio have found evidence that directly links disrupted metabolism (energy production in cells) to a common and often fatal ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.