Cancer Support Network Hong Kong

Cancer Support Network Hong Kong

Whatsapp

Can Proton Therapy Replace Traditional Radiotherapy for the majority of Cancer Patients Who Need Radiation?

From principles and clinical evidence to practical limitations, we’ll guide you through understanding the meaning behind every treatment option in a professional yet unexaggerated way.

Free cancer support
The Hong Kong Cancer Support Network provides you with comprehensive, free cancer information and professional assistance, ensuring that every patient and family member does not have to face the challenge alone.
Talk to someone now

When you or your loved one hears the words “you need radiotherapy,” the emotion is often mixed—part fear, part hope.
 Hope—because it means treatment is still possible.
 Fear—because radiation brings to mind “side effects,” “pain,” and “will my life change?”

In reality, radiotherapy is one of the three cornerstones of modern cancer treatment, alongside surgery and medications. Research shows that 60–70% of all cancer patients will need radiotherapy at some stage of their treatment journey. Far from being a “last resort,” radiation is often essential for either cure or long-term control.

In recent years, however, a new technology has become widely discussed: Proton Therapy (sometimes called the “proton knife”). Many patients now ask:

“If proton therapy is so advanced, does that mean it can replace traditional radiotherapy?”

This article aims to answer this question in clear, patient-friendly language—focusing on what you want to know, not what textbooks say.

Why do so many cancer patients need radiotherapy?

Cancer treatment usually involves a combination of therapies—surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and more.
 Some global estimates suggest that among all patients who are cured or controlled long-term:

  • Surgery contributes around 27%
  • Radiotherapy contributes around 22%
  • Chemotherapy and other treatments together contribute about 6%

In other words:
 Radiotherapy is just as essential as surgery in achieving cancer control, not a backup option.

Radiation works by damaging cancer cell DNA through ionizing radiation. Once cancer cells can no longer divide, they die or are cleared by the body.
 However, traditional X-ray radiation also passes through healthy tissues on its way in—and continues passing out on the other side. This is why patients sometimes experience side effects.

This challenge—killing the tumor while sparing healthy tissue—is exactly why proton therapy was developed.

Traditional radiotherapy uses X-rays (photons).
 Proton therapy uses proton beams—the positively charged particles inside hydrogen atoms.

The major difference lies in how energy is deposited in the body:

  • X-rays: release energy continuously as they enter and exit your body.
  • Protons: release only a small amount of energy initially, then discharge the majority of their radiation at a specific depth—a phenomenon known as the Bragg Peak.

For patients, the practical meaning is simple:

Protons can deliver the highest dose directly inside the tumor while minimizing radiation before and after the target.

This makes proton therapy especially valuable when the tumor is close to critical organs.

What is proton therapy, and how is it different from traditional radiotherapy?

Is proton therapy really safer and more effective?

Many clinical treatment-planning studies comparing photon vs. proton therapy show:

  • Protons can deliver an equal or higher tumor dose
  • Surrounding organs may receive 30–60% less radiation
  • The risk of long-term complications may be significantly lower

For patients, this may translate to:

  • Fewer acute side effects (fatigue, nausea, difficulty swallowing, mouth dryness)
  • Lower risk of long-term organ damage
  • Lower risk of secondary cancers, especially important for children and young adults

That said, the honest truth is:

  1. Proton therapy is not automatically better for every cancer
  2. Some tumors are equally well treated by modern photon techniques like IMRT or VMAT
  3. Clinical evidence is strong for certain cancers but still developing for others

So the responsible conclusion is:

For the right patient, proton therapy can maintain or improve cancer control while reducing side effects—but it is not universally superior for all cases.

When is proton therapy particularly worth considering?

While in theory protons can treat most solid tumors, doctors prioritize it for situations where precision truly matters, such as:

1. Tumors next to critical organs

Examples include:

  • Brainstem
  • Optic nerves
  • Spinal cord
  • Heart and major vessels

When traditional X-rays risk damaging these organs, protons may allow safer and more effective treatment.

2. Childhood cancers

Children’s developing brains, bones, hormones, and organs are extremely sensitive to radiation.
 Protons can significantly reduce long-term developmental issues, learning difficulties, hormonal dysfunction, and secondary cancer risks.

3. Tumors requiring very high doses

Such as:

  • Skull base tumors
  • Chordomas
  • Sarcomas
  • Certain head and neck cancers

4. Re-irradiation cases

If you previously had radiation to a region and the cancer recurs, proton therapy may allow retreatment with lower overall radiation burden.

5. Young adults with long life expectancy

Because they will live longer, reducing lifetime radiation exposure is valuable.

Proton therapy vs. traditional radiotherapy: What’s the real difference?

Think of it like this:

  • Traditional photon radiotherapy is like spraying water from multiple doors to reach a fire. You will hit the fire, but furniture along the way gets wet.
  • Proton therapy is like inserting a precise water hose through the wall directly into the burning room. The fire gets the water, the rest of the house stays dry.

Clinically, advantages often include:

  • Higher tumor doses possible
  • Less radiation to normal organs
  • Better shape conforming around irregular tumors
  • Ability to use multiple angles without passing through vital structures
  • Shorter daily treatment time (5–30 minutes), usually no hospital stay

Patients typically feel:

  • Shorter “hard periods” during treatment
  • Lower chance of long-term complications

 

So… can proton therapy fully replace traditional radiotherapy?

Here is the key answer:

Not yet, and also—not necessary.

Why not?

1. Proton therapy is still a form of radiotherapy

It is not a completely different treatment—just a more advanced version.
 For many cancers, modern photon radiotherapy already works extremely well.

2. Not every tumor needs proton-level precision

Some tumors are located away from vital organs, making the difference between photon and proton smaller.

3. Proton centers are expensive and limited in number

A single proton center can cost USD 100 million or more.
 Globally, access is increasing but still limited.

4. Evidence varies by cancer type

For some cancers (ocular melanoma, chordoma, certain pediatric tumors), evidence is very strong.
 For others (breast cancer, lung cancer), studies are ongoing.

Thus, the real question is not:

“Which is better—proton or photon?”

But rather:

“Which option is best for my cancer, in this exact location, in this stage?”

How should patients discuss proton therapy with their doctor?

Here are practical questions to ask:

  1. Will proton therapy significantly reduce radiation to my organs compared with photons?
  2. Is there clinical evidence supporting proton therapy for my cancer type?
  3. What short-term and long-term side effects might be reduced?
  4. What is the cost and insurance coverage?
  5. If proton therapy isn’t possible, will IMRT/VMAT still provide excellent treatment?

These questions help distinguish between chasing technology and making a meaningful medical decision.

Rapid development of proton therapy in Asia

Worldwide, the number of proton and heavy-ion centers is rapidly rising—especially in Asia.
 China alone has more than 70 proton/heavy-ion projects built, under construction, or being planned.
 Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore also continue expanding.

For patients, this means:

  • Access is improving
  • Travel burden decreases
  • More Asian-specific clinical data will emerge
  • Local medical teams gain experience yearly

But remember:

Even the most advanced machine is only a tool.
 What truly determines your outcome is the expertise of the team using it—and how your overall cancer treatment is designed.

Conclusion: Proton therapy is hope—not a magic cure

More than 60–70% of cancer patients need radiotherapy.
 Proton therapy is one of the most advanced forms available today—offering accuracy, organ protection, and reduced side effects for selected patients.

However:

  • It will not fully replace traditional radiotherapy soon
  • It is not necessary for every patient
  • It is best viewed as a powerful option within the radiotherapy toolbox, not a replacement for all others

The true goal is not to use the “newest” technology but to choose the right therapy—one that offers the greatest benefit, the safest profile, and the best long-term quality of life for you.

If you are standing at a treatment crossroads, bring your concerns, fears, and questions to your doctor. You do not have to walk this road alone.

Want to know how to choose the most suitable adjuvant therapy for cancer?

Contact our specialists now for professional advice and let us work together to find the best solution for you or your family.
Speak with a specialist immediately

Contact our professional team now

References

Scroll to Top

Review My Order

0

Subtotal

Taxes & shipping calculated at checkout

Checkout