Radiation Oncologists
12 years of experience
Video profile
Accepting new patients
2800 E Highway 114
Ste 200
Roanoke, TX 76262
817-543-4647
Locations and availability (3)

Education ?

Medical School Score Rankings
The University of Texas at Houston (1998)
  • Currently 3 of 4 apples
Top 50%

Awards & Distinctions ?

Associations
American Society of Clinical Oncology
American Board of Radiology

Affiliations ?

Dr. Amosson is affiliated with 20 hospitals.

Hospital Affilations

Score

Rankings

  • Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Of Dallas
    Medical Oncology
    8200 Walnut Hill Ln, Dallas, TX 75231
    • Currently 4 of 4 crosses
    Top 25%
  • Texas Health Harris Methodist Hospital Southwest Fort Worth
    6100 Harris Pkwy, Fort Worth, TX 76132
    • Currently 4 of 4 crosses
    Top 25%
  • Harris Methodist H E B
    Medical Oncology
    1600 Hospital Pkwy, Bedford, TX 76022
    • Currently 4 of 4 crosses
    Top 25%
  • Baylor Regional Medical Center At Grapevine
    Medical Oncology
    1650 W College St, Grapevine, TX 76051
    • Currently 4 of 4 crosses
    Top 25%
  • Texas Health Arlington Memorial Hospital
    Medical Oncology
    800 W Randol Mill Rd, Arlington, TX 76012
    • Currently 3 of 4 crosses
    Top 50%
  • Medical Center Of Arlington
    3301 Matlock Rd, Arlington, TX 76015
    • Currently 3 of 4 crosses
    Top 50%
  • Texas Health Harris Methodist Hospital Azle
    108 Denver Trl, Azle, TX 76020
    • Currently 3 of 4 crosses
    Top 50%
  • Denton Regional Medical Center
    Medical Oncology
    3535 S Interstate 35 E, Denton, TX 76210
    • Currently 2 of 4 crosses
  • Baylor All Saints Medical Centers
    Medical Oncology
    1400 8th Ave, Fort Worth, TX 76104
    • Currently 2 of 4 crosses
  • Denton Hospital
    3000 N Interstate 35, Denton, TX 76201
    • Currently 2 of 4 crosses
  • Usmd Surgical Hospital Of Arlington
    801 W Interstate 20, Arlington, TX 76017
    • Currently 1 of 4 crosses
  • Trophy Club Medical Plaza
    2800 E Highway 114, Roanoke, TX 76262
    • Currently 1 of 4 crosses
  • Baylor Medical Center at Trophy Club
    2850 E Highway 114, Trophy Club, TX 76262
  • TX Health Arlington
  • Usmd Hospital of Arlington
  • Baylor Rmc At Grapevine
  • Kindred Hospital Arlington
  • Harris Methodist - Springwood
    1608 Hospital Pkwy, Bedford, TX 76022
  • Harris Continued Care Hospital
    1301 Pennsylvania Ave, Fort Worth, TX 76104
  • Texas Health Physicians Group
  • Publications & Research

    Dr. Amosson has contributed to 5 publications.
    Title Impact of Setup Uncertainty in the Dosimetry of Prostate and Surrounding Tissues in Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Peacock/imrt.
    Date June 2005
    Journal Medical Dosimetry : Official Journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists
    Excerpt

    The purpose of this paper was to assess the effect of setup uncertainty on dosimetry of prostate, seminal vesicles, bladder, rectum, and colon in prostate cancer patients treated with Peacock intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Ten patients underwent computed tomography (CT) scans using the "prostate box" for external, and an "endorectal balloon" for target immobilization devices, and treatment plans were generated (T1). A maximum of +/-5-mm setup error was chosen to model dosimetric effects. Isodose lines from the T1 treatment plan were then superimposed on each patient's CT anatomy shifted by 5 mm toward the cephalad and caudal direction, generating 2 more dosimetric plans (H1 and H2, respectively). Average mean doses ranged from 74.5 to 74.92 Gy for prostate and 73.65 to 74.94 Gy for seminal vesicles. Average percent target volume below 70 Gy increased significantly for seminal vesicles, from 0.53% to 6.26%, but minimally for prostate, from 2.08% to 4.4%. Dose statistics adhered to prescription limits for normal tissues. Setup uncertainty had minimum impact on target dose escalation and normal tissue dosing. The impact of target dose inhomogeneity is currently evaluated in clinical studies.

    Title Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (imrt) in the Management of Prostate Cancer.
    Date February 2005
    Journal Cancer Investigation
    Excerpt

    Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is gaining widespread use in the radiation therapy community. Prostate cancer is the ideal target for IMRT due to the growing body of literature supporting dose escalation and normal tissue limitations. The need for dose escalation and the limits of conventional radiation therapy necessitate precise patient and prostate localization as well as advanced treatment delivery. The treatment of prostate cancer has been dramatically altered by the introduction of technology that can focus on the target while avoiding normal tissue. IMRT is evolving as the treatment of the future for prostate cancer.

    Title Dosimetric Predictors of Xerostomia for Head-and-neck Cancer Patients Treated with the Smart (simultaneous Modulated Accelerated Radiation Therapy) Boost Technique.
    Date May 2003
    Journal International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics
    Excerpt

    PURPOSE: To evaluate the predictors of xerostomia in the treatment of head-and-neck cancers treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), using the simultaneous modulated accelerated radiation therapy (SMART) boost technique. Dosimetric parameters of the parotid glands are correlated to subjective salivary gland function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1996 and June 2000, 30 patients with at least 6 months follow-up were evaluated for subjective xerostomia after being treated definitively for head-and-neck cancer with the SMART boost technique. Threshold limits for the ipsilateral and contralateral parotid glands were 35 Gy and 25 Gy, respectively. Dosimetric parameters to the parotid glands were evaluated. The median follow-up time was 38.5 months (mean 39.9 months). The results of the dosimetric parameters and questionnaire were statistically correlated. RESULTS: Xerostomia was assessed with a 10-question subjective salivary gland function questionnaire. The salivary gland function questionnaire (questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 9) correlated significantly with the dosimetric parameters (mean and maximum doses and volume and percent above tolerance) of the parotid glands. These questions related to overall comfort, eating, and abnormal taste. Questions related to thirst, difficulty with speech or sleep, and the need to carry water daily did not correlate statistically with the dosimetric parameters of the parotid glands. CONCLUSIONS: Questions regarding overall comfort, eating, and abnormal taste correlated significantly with the dosimetric parameters of the parotid glands. Questions related to thirst, difficulty with speech or sleep, and the need to carry water daily did not correlate statistically with the dosimetric parameters of the parotid glands. Dosimetric sparing of the parotid glands improved subjective xerostomia. IMRT in the treatment of head-and-neck cancer can be exploited to preserve the parotid glands and decrease xerostomia. This is feasible even with an accelerated treatment regimen like the SMART boost. More patients need to be evaluated using IMRT to identify relevant dosimetric parameters.

    Title Using Technology to Decrease Xerostomia for Head and Neck Cancer Patients Treated with Radiation Therapy.
    Date February 2003
    Journal Seminars in Oncology
    Excerpt

    The treatment of head and neck cancer has evolved from conventional fields encompassing large volumes of normal tissue to focused treatment aimed at conforming the dose around the target while avoiding normal tissue. Intensity modulated radiation therapy has changed the way radiation oncologists think about head and neck cancer. Using the concepts of conformal treatment and avoidance, the therapeutic ratio can be improved and technology exploited to the patients' advantage. This is particularly evident with head and neck irradiation, where a common side effect is xerostomia. By decreasing xerostomia through conformal avoidance of the parotid glands, we can improve patient satisfaction and quality of life. In this study, xerostomia is assessed through a subjective salivary gland function questionnaire. This article examines the use of intensity modulated radiation therapy in the treatment of head and neck cancer to decrease xerostomia. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the significance of parotid gland dosimetry in relation to subjective salivary gland function.

    Title Sequencing of Chemotherapy and Radiation in Lymph Node-negative Breast Cancer.
    Date August 1999
    Journal The Cancer Journal from Scientific American
    Excerpt

    PURPOSE: To conduct a retrospective analysis of chemotherapy and radiation sequencing in lymph node-negative breast cancer patients treated with breast-conserving surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between February 1982 and January 1996, 124 patients with lymph node-negative breast cancer underwent breast-conserving surgery with axillary dissection followed by chemotherapy and radiation therapy. The outcome of 68 patients who received chemotherapy first was compared with that of 56 patients who received radiation first. The two groups were balanced with respect to patient age, tumor stage, margin status, and estrogen and progesterone receptor status. Sixty-two percent of the patients had T1 primary disease. The median follow-up among surviving patients was 44 months for the chemotherapy-first group and 61 months for the radiation-first group. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in local control, disease-free survival, or overall survival between the two groups. Five-year actuarial rates for local control for the chemotherapy-first and the radiation-first groups were 100% and 94%, respectively. Five-year recurrence-free rates for the chemotherapy-first and radiation-first groups were 92% and 77%, respectively. The 5-year overall survival rate was 89% for both groups. DISCUSSION: Giving chemotherapy before radiation in lymph node-negative breast cancer did not compromise local control. Given the concerns about increased distant metastases if radiation is given first, the chemotherapy-radiation sequence is recommended.


    Similar doctors nearby

    Dr. Ajay Dubey

    Radiation Oncology
    17 years experience
    Bedford, TX

    Dr. Zainab Ilahi

    Radiation Oncology
    13 years experience
    Lewisville, TX

    Dr. Jeffery Morton

    Radiation Oncology
    25 years experience
    Denton, TX

    Dr. Dong Kim

    Radiation Oncology
    9 years experience
    Denton, TX

    Dr. Matthew Cavey

    Radiation Oncology
    9 years experience
    Denton, TX

    Dr. Gregory Echt

    Radiation Oncology
    25 years experience
    Irving, TX
    Search All Similar Doctors