Gail,
I am not a doctor but what I have seen here is that often tumors that are poorly differentiated and invasive are treated more often with XRT.

And I think that you have it backwards, new data would suggest that IMRT may be superior for certain H&N types rather than the other way around. It is unlikely that they would do ongoing efficacy studies for well established treatment methodologies.

IMRT has only been around for 10 years and in relatively common use for about 5. When I got mine in 2003, only the CCC's had it. Now most regional treatment centers have upgraded their LINACs with an MLC (Multileaf Collimator) as well. So the long term data on efficacy of IMRT is still coming in. The same LINAC that produces XRT is also used for 3D conformal and IMRT - it's a matter of the collimation techniques and apparatus.

I questioned my treatment plan pre Tx and got it switched from XRT to IMRT. I am satisified that it was a good choice (for me). Every patient and every tumor is different so what works for me may not be the best thing for you. They did target ptotential areas as well.


Treatment options need to be addressed pre-Tx. It doesn't serve any useful purpose to go into it during Tx other than to ratchet up additional fears and doubts.

Glenn,
3D conformal is very similar to IMRT, in fact, an earlier incarnation of it. Just as tomotherapy is the latest incarnattion of IMRT.

Nelie,
I have heard 18 months mimimun for salivary gland recovery (and my personal experience as well).