Sheng Yuting, Han Daniel M, Wakefield Mark R, Fang Yujiang
Department of Microbiology, Immunology & Pathology, Des Moines University College of Osteopathic Medicine, West Des Moines, IA 50266, USA.
Department of Surgery, University of Missouri School of Medicine, Columbia, MO 65212, USA.
Explor Target Antitumor Ther. 2025 Aug 28;6:1002334. doi: 10.37349/etat.2025.1002334. eCollection 2025.
Cancer is the second leading cause of death globally and in the United States, second only to cardiovascular disease. Unlike many cardiovascular conditions, cancer is often less preventable, manageable, and curable-even with ongoing technological advancements in medicine. The adverse effects of cancer treatments on cancer patients remain profound due to shared cellular characteristics between cancerous and normal cells; one of the primary adverse effects is treatment-induced inflammation. These inflammatory responses aim to eliminate cancerous cells but often damage normal tissues. Notably, inflammatory side effects vary considerably across the growing diversity of therapeutic approaches. This study reviewed studies between 2007 and 2024, comparing the inflammatory profiles associated with five major radiation therapies (RTs): Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy (3D-CRT), Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT), Image-Guided Radiation Therapy (IGRT), Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT), and Proton Beam Therapy (PBT)-each characterized by distinct mechanistic and therapeutic features. In addition to each radiation modality eliciting distinct inflammatory responses, tissue-specific variability further complicates clinical outcomes. Accordingly, this review also undertakes a cross-tissue comparison of radiation-induced inflammation, with a focus on the gastrointestinal (GI) system, central nervous system (CNS), and skin. However, the variation in treatment modalities and organ-specific inflammatory biomarkers greatly hinders direct comparison across studies. Finally, this review highlights potential inflammatory mitigations, including ambroxol, that may be employed synergistically with RTs, minimizing side effects and enhancing patient outcomes. Taken together, while all modalities offer therapeutic value alongside certain limitations, proton-based therapy demonstrates the greatest potential for minimizing toxicity though its broader adoption remains limited by cost-effectiveness concerns.
癌症是全球和美国第二大死因,仅次于心血管疾病。与许多心血管疾病不同,癌症往往较难预防、管理和治愈,即便医学技术不断进步亦是如此。由于癌细胞与正常细胞具有共同的细胞特征,癌症治疗对癌症患者的不良影响仍然很大;主要不良影响之一是治疗引起的炎症。这些炎症反应旨在消除癌细胞,但往往会损害正常组织。值得注意的是,炎症副作用在日益多样化的治疗方法中差异很大。本研究回顾了2007年至2024年期间的研究,比较了与五种主要放射治疗(RT)相关的炎症特征:三维适形放射治疗(3D-CRT)、调强放射治疗(IMRT)、图像引导放射治疗(IGRT)、立体定向体部放射治疗(SBRT)和质子束治疗(PBT),每种治疗都有独特的机制和治疗特点。除了每种放射治疗方式引发不同的炎症反应外,组织特异性差异进一步使临床结果复杂化。因此,本综述还对放射诱导的炎症进行了跨组织比较,重点关注胃肠道(GI)系统、中枢神经系统(CNS)和皮肤。然而,治疗方式和器官特异性炎症生物标志物的差异极大地阻碍了各研究之间的直接比较。最后,本综述强调了潜在的炎症缓解措施,包括氨溴索,可与放射治疗协同使用,以尽量减少副作用并改善患者预后。综上所述,虽然所有治疗方式都有治疗价值,但也存在一定局限性,基于质子的治疗在最小化毒性方面显示出最大潜力,不过其更广泛的应用仍受到成本效益问题的限制。