Stereotactic body radiotherapy alone versus stereotactic body radiotherapy after incomplete transarterial therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology Pub Date : 2024-10-20 DOI:10.1111/1754-9485.13794
Youngju Song, Jinhong Jung, Jin-Hong Park, So Yeon Kim, Jonggi Choi, Danbi Lee, Ju Hyun Shim, Kang Mo Kim, Young-Suk Lim, Han Chu Lee, Sang Min Yoon
{"title":"Stereotactic body radiotherapy alone versus stereotactic body radiotherapy after incomplete transarterial therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.","authors":"Youngju Song, Jinhong Jung, Jin-Hong Park, So Yeon Kim, Jonggi Choi, Danbi Lee, Ju Hyun Shim, Kang Mo Kim, Young-Suk Lim, Han Chu Lee, Sang Min Yoon","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.13794","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We investigated the clinical outcomes of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) alone versus SBRT after incomplete transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for a single recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) smaller than 5 cm.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent SBRT for a single recurrent HCC ≤5 cm, without vascular invasion or extrahepatic metastasis. Patients were divided into the SBRT-alone group and the TACE-SBRT group. The primary outcome was the local control (LC) rate, and secondary outcomes were survivals and treatment-related toxicities. We additionally conducted a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 477 patients were available for analysis. Among them, 54 patients received SBRT without prior treatment to the target lesion (SBRT-alone group), whereas 423 patients received SBRT for viable HCC after TACE (TACE-SBRT group). The 3-year LC rates did not differ between the two groups (SBRT-alone group, 88.6% vs. TACE-SBRT group, 89.6%, P = 0.918). The 3-year rates of overall survival, out-of-field intrahepatic recurrence-free survival and recurrence-free survival were also not significantly different (P = 0.479, 0.290 and 0.273, respectively). Even after PSM, LC and survival rates at 3 years were not significantly different.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SBRT alone demonstrated comparable local control and survival outcomes to SBRT following incomplete TACE. SBRT alone may be considered an alternative treatment option for a single recurrent HCC smaller than 5 cm when curative treatments or TACE are not feasible.</p>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13794","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: We investigated the clinical outcomes of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) alone versus SBRT after incomplete transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for a single recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) smaller than 5 cm.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent SBRT for a single recurrent HCC ≤5 cm, without vascular invasion or extrahepatic metastasis. Patients were divided into the SBRT-alone group and the TACE-SBRT group. The primary outcome was the local control (LC) rate, and secondary outcomes were survivals and treatment-related toxicities. We additionally conducted a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

Results: A total of 477 patients were available for analysis. Among them, 54 patients received SBRT without prior treatment to the target lesion (SBRT-alone group), whereas 423 patients received SBRT for viable HCC after TACE (TACE-SBRT group). The 3-year LC rates did not differ between the two groups (SBRT-alone group, 88.6% vs. TACE-SBRT group, 89.6%, P = 0.918). The 3-year rates of overall survival, out-of-field intrahepatic recurrence-free survival and recurrence-free survival were also not significantly different (P = 0.479, 0.290 and 0.273, respectively). Even after PSM, LC and survival rates at 3 years were not significantly different.

Conclusion: SBRT alone demonstrated comparable local control and survival outcomes to SBRT following incomplete TACE. SBRT alone may be considered an alternative treatment option for a single recurrent HCC smaller than 5 cm when curative treatments or TACE are not feasible.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肝细胞癌经动脉治疗不彻底后单纯立体定向体放射治疗与立体定向体放射治疗的比较。
简介我们研究了单纯立体定向体放射治疗(SBRT)与经动脉化疗栓塞术(TACE)治疗小于5厘米的单发复发性肝细胞癌(HCC)的临床疗效:我们回顾性地查看了因单发复发性肝细胞癌(HCC)小于5厘米、无血管侵犯或肝外转移而接受SBRT治疗的患者的病历。患者被分为SBRT单独组和TACE-SBRT组。主要结果是局部控制(LC)率,次要结果是存活率和治疗相关毒性反应。我们还进行了倾向评分匹配(PSM)分析:共有 477 例患者可供分析。其中,54 例患者在未对靶病灶进行治疗的情况下接受了 SBRT 治疗(SBRT-单独组),而 423 例患者在 TACE 后接受了针对存活 HCC 的 SBRT 治疗(TACE-SBRT 组)。两组患者的3年生存率没有差异(SBRT-alone组88.6% vs. TACE-SBRT组89.6%,P = 0.918)。3年总生存率、场外肝内无复发生存率和无复发生存率也无显著差异(P = 0.479、0.290 和 0.273)。即使在 PSM 后,LC 和 3 年生存率也无明显差异:结论:单纯 SBRT 与不完全 TACE 后的 SBRT 的局部控制和生存率相当。在无法进行根治性治疗或 TACE 的情况下,对于小于 5 厘米的单发复发性 HCC,单用 SBRT 可被视为一种替代治疗方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
133
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology (formerly Australasian Radiology) is the official journal of The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, publishing articles of scientific excellence in radiology and radiation oncology. Manuscripts are judged on the basis of their contribution of original data and ideas or interpretation. All articles are peer reviewed.
期刊最新文献
Abstract. Abstract. Characterising high-risk plaque on cardiac CT. Evaluation of plan quality, safety, and toxicity of brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer in an Australian setting following changes in prescription and applicator design. Lung cancer screening in Australia: The time approaches.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1