Talk:Hyperthermia therapy

CAM side

I think that this article should address the 'alternative medicine' uses of hyperthermia for cancer. ISBN 9783131374516 (Complementary oncology) has a chapter on it that might provide a useful source for some aspects. Coley's Toxins needs to be added to the ==History== section as well. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:11, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Specific detail I want

Everything I've seen about the mechanism is specific to solid tumors. Can we find a source that addresses whether or not it would work in leukemia? Leukemia cells will not have the hypoxic/acidic/nutrient deprived microenvironment that seems to drive the solid tumor responses, but my just saying so is WP:OR. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:11, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

• I looked briefly on PubMed but didn't see anything about HT and leukemia, and it's not something we typically use it for (though I am no expert on it either). Conceptually, that makes sense, since leukemia is a bone marrow/peripheral blood disorder. As a combination therapy with radiation, you typically want ~42C, which is not really feasible to deliver to the whole body. You could probably use it for localized leukemic deposits (chloroma), but those tend to be quite sensitive to radiation and don't need the concurrent HT. The main clinical uses tend to be as a potentiator of radiation therapy in patients who were previously treated with radiation and have a local recurrence in previously irradiated area. That usually limits the re-treatment radiation dose, and HT is felt to improve the therapeutic index. Main indications tend to be for breast cancer, melanoma, and head & neck cancer recurrences (all solid tumors that are local, shallow, and thus easily heatable). Tdvorak (talk) 04:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

One more source

ISBN 9780387334400, Hyperthermia in Cancer Treatment, looks like it will make a good source. Perhaps someone else will have a few minutes to exploit it. I'm going to start (tomorrow) with the "Introduction" to get some more history and overview information. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:14, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Radiation Oncology Link

I have few of the medical papers dealing with hyperthermia and radiation (which as far as I know is the most common use of hyperthermia in medicine) on the wikibooks.org radiation oncology site. While not extensive, you may find some of it helpful, although possibly too technical for this page. Tdvorak (talk) 04:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Hypoxia; misuse of term

from WP "Hypoxia (also known as hypoxiation or anoxemia) is a condition in which the body or a region of the body is deprived of adequate oxygen supply. Hypoxia may be classified as either generalized, affecting the whole body, or local, affecting a region of the body."

This article (WP:Hyperthermia therapy) is using "hypoxic" in a paragraph describing the benefits of increased oxygenation. This is an error. 124.171.198.7 (talk) 23:44, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Merge Magnetic hyperthermia into this article?

According to the article, Magnetic hyperthermia is an experimental therapy which has only been tried once in humans. I don't think it merits a separate article. In addition, to make it an adequate article would require a good deal of redundant content on hyperthermia in general which is already explained in this article. --Chetvorno^TALK 17:12, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

the study is important and the article should not be merged with simple hyperthermia. many resaech groupd fro india,us, japan , malasia and china are working on magnetic hyperthermia. --117.239.83.199 (talk) 23:46, 26 February 2018(UTC)

Seems like a reasonable suggestion, with magnetic hyperthermia clearly being a therapy using hyperthermia. --tronvillain (talk) 16:42, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

It's been over a year and no one has made a real argument not to, so I merged the articles. Natureium (talk) 17:10, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you --Chetvorno^TALK 17:33, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Remove the warning box?

I realize the box is intended to encourage editors to improve the article, but "This article may present fringe theories, without giving appropriate weight to the mainstream view" is a bit strong and may not be necessary. Perhaps there could just be a sentence or two stating that it is not widely used in North America but is commonly used in countries such as Germany, if that is the case. It might also be mentioned that it may not be covered by health insurance in the U.S., if that is typically the case.