Don't be fooled

by the advertising of radiation oncology centers (or other medical specialties)

In the LA Times today there is an ad for Tomotherapy offered at City of Hope. The ad promises a couple of things worth pointing out.

The ad states there are no incisions with Tomotherapy. This is correct-but there are no incisions with any other type of external beam radiation therapy either. The ad is technically correct but is very misleading by suggesting Tomo is better for this reason. This is folly.

The ad also mentions correcting the radiation position by using 3D imaging and implies it is the only and the best way to do this. This is blatently incorrect. There are other machines that use imaging to correct alignment. Tomotherapy has never been proven to be superior to these other machines. The ad is just not telling the truth.

The ad says that side effects will be reduced. Reduced compared to what? There have been no comparisons between Tomotherapy and IGRT (Trilogy), Elektas machines, or others to suggest Tomo is better. And side effects are lowered with all these machines compared to traditional external beam techniques. This is just an attempt to use misleading statements to convince patients that City of Hope is better and Tomotherapy is superior. Neither are.


City of Hope is tooting the horn of Tomotherapy in the wrong way and it is unfair to desperate patients looking for answers.

These ads are misleading and an example of taking advantage of the publics trust. The ads intention is to gather business and it is a shame that City of Hope allows these ads without proper review to make sure they are completely truthful or not misleading in any way.

I have seen many patients who believe such advertising. They want so badly to believe the hype and will drive an extra 90 minutes each day for 8 weeks to go to City of Hope or other places that use ads in this way --and they will not get any better treatment than if they stayed near their own home.

To be fair there are some instances where tomotherapy, or IMRT, or IGRT, or proton therapy will be very useful. But this should be decided by your radiation oncologist and surgeon--not by some misleading advertisement in the LA Times.

City of Hope is an exellent institution and deserves its wonderful reputation. But I think they should carefully review ads promoting themselves to make sure they are not misleading in any way.

What is radiation therapy?

Radiation therapy is simply the use of x-rays to kill cancer cells.

We use the same type of x-rays that you would receive in getting a mammogram, dental x-ray, or CT scan.

The x-rays used in radiation therapy are given in a higher dose and use a higher energy. But, generally, they are the same x-rays as getting a regular x-ray.

Because radiation is just x-rays--a patient will not feel the treatment any more than when getting a chest x-ray. Basically, the treatment is painless.

However, there can be eventual side effects. And side effects come in two types. Short term and long term.

Side effects will generally only be in the area treated. X-rays do not affect parts of the body not in the treatment beam.

Short term side effects are those you may experience during the 3-8 weeks of therapy. They are due to irritation and inflamation from the x-rays. Sore throat or red skin are examples.

Long term side effects are due to actual tissue changes from the radiation and not inflamation. These can appear 6 months onward up to many years. Each tissue/organ in the body has a certain tolerance to radiation and if exceeded can cause a long term effect in that organ.

So be sure to ask your radiation oncologist to fully explain all short and long term side effects. No sense in being surprised.