Efficacy and Safety of Four Weeks of Moderately Hypofractionated Chemoradiation for Unresectable, Stage 3 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review.
Joanna Jane Ludbrook, Mahesh Kumar, Yu Yang Soon, Angela Smith, Girish Mallesara, Eric Hau, Fiona Hegi-Johnson, Shalini Vinod
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Four Weeks of Moderately Hypofractionated Chemoradiation for Unresectable, Stage 3 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Joanna Jane Ludbrook, Mahesh Kumar, Yu Yang Soon, Angela Smith, Girish Mallesara, Eric Hau, Fiona Hegi-Johnson, Shalini Vinod","doi":"10.1111/ajco.14152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Shortening treatment time with moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy benefits patients by reducing inconvenience and costs, but its use in the definitive treatment of unresectable Stage 3 non-small cell lung cancer is controversial due to lack of level one evidence and toxicity concerns. Pivotal systemic therapy trials utilize conventionally fractionated chemoradiation at 2 Gy per fraction given over 6 weeks. In practice, 4 weeks of chemoradiation at 2.75 Gy per fraction is sometimes employed to reduce the treatment burden for selected patients, especially those who are older or have comorbidities. It is uncertain if the two fractionation regimens are similar in biologically effectiveness, especially with varying systemic therapy. This systematic review aimed to collate the survival and toxicity outcomes for 4 weeks of moderately hypofractionated chemoradiation, using > 50 -60 Gy in 20 fractions. Eight studies met the eligibility criteria; seven studies were from a database search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science and one study was added later. Two studies were prospective randomized trials and six were retrospective cohort studies. No study included immunotherapy. The historical evidence has been limited, but emerging data is promising, especially when compared to outcomes of standard chemoradiation. Thus, further investigation of this strategy is justified.</p>","PeriodicalId":8633,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajco.14152","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Shortening treatment time with moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy benefits patients by reducing inconvenience and costs, but its use in the definitive treatment of unresectable Stage 3 non-small cell lung cancer is controversial due to lack of level one evidence and toxicity concerns. Pivotal systemic therapy trials utilize conventionally fractionated chemoradiation at 2 Gy per fraction given over 6 weeks. In practice, 4 weeks of chemoradiation at 2.75 Gy per fraction is sometimes employed to reduce the treatment burden for selected patients, especially those who are older or have comorbidities. It is uncertain if the two fractionation regimens are similar in biologically effectiveness, especially with varying systemic therapy. This systematic review aimed to collate the survival and toxicity outcomes for 4 weeks of moderately hypofractionated chemoradiation, using > 50 -60 Gy in 20 fractions. Eight studies met the eligibility criteria; seven studies were from a database search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science and one study was added later. Two studies were prospective randomized trials and six were retrospective cohort studies. No study included immunotherapy. The historical evidence has been limited, but emerging data is promising, especially when compared to outcomes of standard chemoradiation. Thus, further investigation of this strategy is justified.
期刊介绍:
Asia–Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology is a multidisciplinary journal of oncology that aims to be a forum for facilitating collaboration and exchanging information on what is happening in different countries of the Asia–Pacific region in relation to cancer treatment and care. The Journal is ideally positioned to receive publications that deal with diversity in cancer behavior, management and outcome related to ethnic, cultural, economic and other differences between populations. In addition to original articles, the Journal publishes reviews, editorials, letters to the Editor and short communications. Case reports are generally not considered for publication, only exceptional papers in which Editors find extraordinary oncological value may be considered for review. The Journal encourages clinical studies, particularly prospectively designed clinical trials.