Why the study?
Clinical recommendations for proton therapy use in Spain were needed to address indications, access limitations, and to support equitable patient selection.
A multidisciplinary consensus utilizing the RAND/UCLA methodology established structured, evidence-informed clinical recommendations for proton therapy use in Spain.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports expert appropriateness criteria for proton therapy; leaves open prospective trials before changing practice.
statements were evaluated through a two-round anonymous voting process, with consensus predefined as agreement by at least 75% of voters.Results: A total of 60 statements were evaluated, achieving consensus for all reviewed items.Fifty statements (83%) were rated as appropriate for proton therapy use, eight (13%) as uncertain and two (3%) as inappropriate.Following expert discussion, several statements were reformulated or merged to improve consistency and clinical applicability.The final recommendations address paediatric and adult indications, tumour site-specific scenarios and clinical situations in which proton therapy is most likely to provide meaningful benefit within the current Spanish setting, taking into account limited access to facilities.Conclusions: This SEOR-SPROMP multidisciplinary consensus provides structured, evidence-informed clinical recommendations for proton therapy use in Spain, complementing national health system indications.The RAND/UCLA methodology enabled robust multidisciplinary agreement while reflecting real-world access constraints.These recommendations support equitable patient selection, streamline referral processes and provide a framework for the future expansion of proton therapy services.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gao et al. (2026) studied Proton therapy indications. Proton therapy was evaluated on Consensus on appropriateness of clinical statements. A multidisciplinary consensus evaluation of 60 statements regarding proton therapy use in Spain achieved consensus for all items, with 83% rated as appropriate.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: