Both journals are anchored in large scientific societies and serve basically the same medical , physical and biological community and at the same scientific level ; the two journals are in the most recent Impact Factor list ranked almost back to back , indicating an equal importance and contribution to science .
Radiotherapy and Oncology is more than a scientific journal , it also serves other purpose s such as facilitate education through ( educational ) review s and improving the st and ard of care by bringing forward guidelines for conduct of radiotherapy .
Finally , the journal also tries to maintain a communication platform between the science produced by the membership of ESTRO and therefore it brings papers frommembers in the different European countries , sometimes at the expense of ultimate scientific quality , but with the underst and ing that it is important that the entire ESTRO membership gets access and opportunity to publish in a high ranked journal .
ESTRO , the European Society for Therapeutic Radiation Oncology , or with its new name European Society for Radiation Oncology , is a scientific society .
It means that the prime aim of ESTRO is to bring to bring people together on an individual basis who have a common interest in improving the scientific conduct of radiotherapy and cancer treatment in Europe by ensuring that proper radiotherapy is available in the multidisciplinary treatment of cancer and applied with the right indication and with the most optimal technique .
One of the main aims of this endeavour was to create a platform for scientific exchange through meetings and through the establishment of a scientific journal [ 1 ] .
Thus Radiotherapy and Oncology was launched shortly after the foundation of ESTRO and has become the society ’s prime vehicle for scientific communication by serving ESTRO members through almost the entire 30 years of the society ’s existence .
The aim was to create a peer review ed high quality international journal and that aim has indeed been fulfilled . ‘ ‘
Is the benefit of postmastectomy irradiation limited to patients with four or more positive nodes, as recommended in international consensus reports? A subgroup analysis of the DBCG 82 b&c randomized trials.
BACKGROUND AND AIM Numerous consensus reports recommend that postmastectomy radiotherapy ( RT ) in addition to systemic therapy is indicated in high-risk patients with 4 + positive nodes , but not in patients with 1 - 3 positive nodes . A subgroup analysis of the DBCG 82 b&c trials was performed to evaluate the loco-regional recurrence rate and survival in relation to number of positive nodes . MATERIAL S AND METHODS In the DBCG 82 b&c trials 3083 pre- and postmenopausal high-risk women were r and omized to postoperative RT in addition to adjuvant systemic therapy . Since many patients had relatively few lymph nodes removed ( median 7 ) , the present analysis was limited to 1152 node positive patients with 8 or more nodes removed . RESULTS The overall 15-year survival rate in the subgroup was 39 % and 29 % ( p=0.015 ) after RT and no RT , respectively . RT reduced the 15-year loco-regional failure rate from 51 % to 10 % ( p<0.001 ) in 4 + positive node patients and from 27 % to 4 % ( p<0.001 ) in patients with 1 - 3 positive nodes . Similarly , the 15-year survival benefit after RT was significantly improved in both patients with 1 - 3 positive nodes ( 57 % vs 48 % , p=0.03 ) and in patients with 4 + positive nodes ( 21 % vs 12 % , p=0.03 ) . CONCLUSION The survival benefit after postmastectomy RT was substantial and similar in patients with 1 - 3 and 4 + positive lymph nodes . Furthermore , it was not strictly associated with the risk of loco-regional recurrence , which was most pronounced in patients with 4 + positive nodes . The indication for RT seems therefore to be at least equally beneficial in patients with 1 - 3 positive nodes , and future consensus should be modified accordingly
Both journals are anchored in large scientific societies and serve basically the same medical , physical and biological community and at the same scientific level ; the two journals are in the most recent Impact Factor list ranked almost back to back , indicating an equal importance and contribution to science .
Radiotherapy and Oncology is more than a scientific journal , it also serves other purpose s such as facilitate education through ( educational ) review s and improving the st and ard of care by bringing forward guidelines for conduct of radiotherapy .
Finally , the journal also tries to maintain a communication platform between the science produced by the membership of ESTRO and therefore it brings papers frommembers in the different European countries , sometimes at the expense of ultimate scientific quality , but with the underst and ing that it is important that the entire ESTRO membership gets access and opportunity to publish in a high ranked journal .
ESTRO , the European Society for Therapeutic Radiation Oncology , or with its new name European Society for Radiation Oncology , is a scientific society .
It means that the prime aim of ESTRO is to bring to bring people together on an individual basis who have a common interest in improving the scientific conduct of radiotherapy and cancer treatment in Europe by ensuring that proper radiotherapy is available in the multidisciplinary treatment of cancer and applied with the right indication and with the most optimal technique .
One of the main aims of this endeavour was to create a platform for scientific exchange through meetings and through the establishment of a scientific journal [ 1 ] .
Thus Radiotherapy and Oncology was launched shortly after the foundation of ESTRO and has become the society ’s prime vehicle for scientific communication by serving ESTRO members through almost the entire 30 years of the society ’s existence .
The aim was to create a peer review ed high quality international journal and that aim has indeed been fulfilled . ‘ ‘