Cancer Research The Future of Cancer Research: Science and Patient Impact  Translational Medicine Conference in Israel
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online

[Cancer Research 44, 4765s-4770s, October 1, 1984]
© 1984 American Association for Cancer Research

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gibbs, F. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gibbs, F. A., Jr.

Regional Hyperthermia: A Clinical Appraisal of Noninvasive Deep-Heating Methods1

Frederic A. Gibbs, Jr.

Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Utah Medical Center, Salt Lake City, Utah 84132

The concentric single-turn self-resonant coil operated at 13.56 MHz (CC) and the annular array applicator (AA) operated at 55 to 100 MHz are the only regional heating devices the clinical use of which has been subjected to sufficient thermometric characterization to be evaluable. The clinical heating characteristics and toxicity of both devices are reviewed. When spatial temperature measurements have been made during clinical treatments with the CC, the observed temperatures have been consistent with theoretical predictions and phantom studies; temperatures fall with increasing radial depth, and potentially injurious heating in superficial normal tissues and ineffective heating in deep-seated tumor loci have been commonly observed. The CC is ineffective in heating central pelvic tumors due to inadequate penetration and power-limiting sacrococcygeal pain. The AA has been demonstrated to heat many deep pelvic tumors to maximum temperatures greater than 42–43° without significant side effects, but further study is needed to determine the feasibility of achieving higher minimum tumor temperatures and longer treatment durations. In the upper abdomen, the AA appears to have a slight superiority in rapid tumor heating at depth, but both devices have major limitations with insufficient penetration (CC) or treatment limiting systemic heating (AA). There has been no adequately thermometrically documented experience with heating in the deep thorax with either device.

1 Presented at the Workshop Conference on Hyperthermia in Cancer Treatment, March 19 to 21, 1984, Tucson, AZ. This review was supported by USPHS Grant CA 29578 and Contract CM 17523.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
Copyright © 1984 by the American Association for Cancer Research.