Yue Lin MD , Muhammad M. Qureshi MBBS, MPH , Sonny Batra MD , Minh-Tam Truong MD , Kimberley S. Mak MD, MPH
{"title":"Consecutive Daily Versus Every Other Day Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Scheduling for Stage I Non-small Cell Lung Cancer","authors":"Yue Lin MD , Muhammad M. Qureshi MBBS, MPH , Sonny Batra MD , Minh-Tam Truong MD , Kimberley S. Mak MD, MPH","doi":"10.1016/j.adro.2024.101625","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>The optimal delivery schedule for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in treating stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. This study used the National Cancer Database to examine daily versus every other day (QOD) SBRT scheduling, including trends over time and association with survival.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><div>The National Cancer Database was used to retrospectively identify patients with stage I NSCLC treated with 3-, 4-, or 5-fraction of SBRT between 2004 and 2016. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression modeling.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 15,269 patients, 3927 (25.7%) received SBRT daily, and 11,342 (74.3%) received treatment QOD. The use of QOD treatment increased from 63.2% in 2007 to 78.3% in 2016, and 5-fraction SBRT increased from 3.7% in 2004 to 51.4% in 2016 (both <em>P <</em> .0001). QOD 5-fraction became the most prevalent scheduling from 2012 to 2016 (28.5% in 2012 to 41.6% in 2016). Factors significantly associated with daily SBRT scheduling included number of fractions, race, lower income, lower comorbidities, and treatment at academic/research programs (all <em>P</em> ≤ .01).</div><div>Median survival for daily SBRT was 37.9 months versus 38.4 months for QOD (<em>P =</em> .4). On multivariable analysis, no difference was found in overall survival between daily versus QOD scheduling (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.04; <em>P =</em> .55). Five-fraction SBRT was associated with worse survival versus 3 fractions (aHR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.03-1.15; <em>P =</em> .002). With 3-fraction SBRT, QOD treatment was associated with improved survival versus daily treatment (aHR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.98; <em>P =</em> .02). With 5-fraction SBRT, QOD treatment was associated with worse survival versus daily treatment (aHR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.02-1.22; <em>P =</em> .02).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>QOD SBRT schedules were more frequently used to treat stage I NSCLC than daily regimens by a factor of 3:1, and QOD 5-fraction SBRT became the most common dose schedule after 2012. Three-fraction QOD SBRT was associated with improved survival versus daily, whereas 5-fraction QOD SBRT was associated with worse survival versus daily.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7390,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","volume":"9 12","pages":"Article 101625"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S245210942400188X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
The optimal delivery schedule for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in treating stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. This study used the National Cancer Database to examine daily versus every other day (QOD) SBRT scheduling, including trends over time and association with survival.
Methods and Materials
The National Cancer Database was used to retrospectively identify patients with stage I NSCLC treated with 3-, 4-, or 5-fraction of SBRT between 2004 and 2016. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression modeling.
Results
Of 15,269 patients, 3927 (25.7%) received SBRT daily, and 11,342 (74.3%) received treatment QOD. The use of QOD treatment increased from 63.2% in 2007 to 78.3% in 2016, and 5-fraction SBRT increased from 3.7% in 2004 to 51.4% in 2016 (both P < .0001). QOD 5-fraction became the most prevalent scheduling from 2012 to 2016 (28.5% in 2012 to 41.6% in 2016). Factors significantly associated with daily SBRT scheduling included number of fractions, race, lower income, lower comorbidities, and treatment at academic/research programs (all P ≤ .01).
Median survival for daily SBRT was 37.9 months versus 38.4 months for QOD (P = .4). On multivariable analysis, no difference was found in overall survival between daily versus QOD scheduling (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.04; P = .55). Five-fraction SBRT was associated with worse survival versus 3 fractions (aHR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.03-1.15; P = .002). With 3-fraction SBRT, QOD treatment was associated with improved survival versus daily treatment (aHR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.98; P = .02). With 5-fraction SBRT, QOD treatment was associated with worse survival versus daily treatment (aHR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.02-1.22; P = .02).
Conclusions
QOD SBRT schedules were more frequently used to treat stage I NSCLC than daily regimens by a factor of 3:1, and QOD 5-fraction SBRT became the most common dose schedule after 2012. Three-fraction QOD SBRT was associated with improved survival versus daily, whereas 5-fraction QOD SBRT was associated with worse survival versus daily.
期刊介绍:
The purpose of Advances is to provide information for clinicians who use radiation therapy by publishing: Clinical trial reports and reanalyses. Basic science original reports. Manuscripts examining health services research, comparative and cost effectiveness research, and systematic reviews. Case reports documenting unusual problems and solutions. High quality multi and single institutional series, as well as other novel retrospective hypothesis generating series. Timely critical reviews on important topics in radiation oncology, such as side effects. Articles reporting the natural history of disease and patterns of failure, particularly as they relate to treatment volume delineation. Articles on safety and quality in radiation therapy. Essays on clinical experience. Articles on practice transformation in radiation oncology, in particular: Aspects of health policy that may impact the future practice of radiation oncology. How information technology, such as data analytics and systems innovations, will change radiation oncology practice. Articles on imaging as they relate to radiation therapy treatment.