About the Ads

seper

10+ Year Member
Dec 22, 2010
1,703
606
Status (Visible)
Thia company appears to be a re-seller of a discredited in UK Chinese kit.

Would expect study to be most rigorous possible under the circumstances. This is john ioannidis’ group.

“Ioannidis's 2005 paper "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False"[1] is the most downloaded paper in the Public Library of Science[14][15] and is considered foundational to the field of metascience.[16] In the paper, Ioannidis demonstrates that most...”
 

RadRadRad

10+ Year Member
Aug 24, 2010
186
143
Status (Visible)
  1. Resident [Any Field]
Right because the patient had lupus and was Using the medication. Not sure how the hypofrac plays into it.

with hyoofracthe max toxicity often Occurs after completing treatment . With standard frac usually occurs prior to completing treatment. advantage of standard frac for cvd is that you can stop early if too much toxicity (or switch to boost early).
 

PhotonBomb

Membership Revoked
Removed
5+ Year Member
Mar 23, 2014
696
642
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
I saw that you liked it on twitter. That one kind of rubs me the wrong way because COVID fractionation schemes aren’t about patient convenience.
 

PhotonBomb

Membership Revoked
Removed
5+ Year Member
Mar 23, 2014
696
642
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
Sure about what though? I don’t disagree with what Simul is saying. I’m just saying that I didn’t agree with Vulcan’s choice of words because people using short courses right now is about more than patient convenience.

Don’t disagree that this probably exposed some practitioners to fractionation schemes they weren’t previously using and perhaps some will continue to use these after COVID is over, adding another dent in the market.

Personally I think A bigger impact of COVID is stuff like telehealth and relaxed supervision rules because these make the jobs of rad oncs easier and helps their pocketbooks if they require less people around. Rad oncs are likely to go back to longer fractionation schemes after COVID in order to recoup some money, but do agree that there will surely be some who had never done prostate hypofrac or 5-fraction breast that may like it and may be willing to take the financial hit
 

RadOncDoc21

10+ Year Member
Oct 24, 2010
1,968
2,582
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
“Steve”, as Trump calls him, is not going to come out of this looking very good.

Still got the second half to go. Maybe he’ll start throwing down the field more, run some trick plays. Maybe the game will get cancelled!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

RadOncMegatron

Blasting Away Cancer!
10+ Year Member
Mar 30, 2009
529
905
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
The frequentist approach is the most conservative and no assumptions about priors are made. Most clinical trials use this approach and as a result are conservative. Bayesian approaches invoke pre-test probabilities and are more efficient. CTEP tends to be conservative. My point is not to use this paper to bash all of science. A well-designed, randomized controlled trial is the best method to determine the true effect.

It was my assumption while reading Ioannidis work, he is including all medical research. His other infamous quote, at least attributed to him, is that 90% of medical research is false (anyone verify?). I think any of us who have perused the literature (which I think includes all low-tier journals) would agree with the sentiment at least. In some video he shows the thousands of articles out there, which is crazy. There are definitely too many medical journals and rubbish articles out there (yes, I am guilty of writing some of those :dead: ).

The well designed, randomized control trial, is definitely < 10% of the literature. Am I reading it wrong here?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
About the Ads

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.