Radiofrequency ablation versus stereotactic body radiotherapy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter, propensity score matching analysis.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY BMC Cancer Pub Date : 2025-03-08 DOI:10.1186/s12885-025-13800-1
Zi-Hui Ma, Xiao-Lu Lin, Feng-Hua Liu, Jing-Lei Zhang, Mao-Lin Yan, Xing-Chao Song, Lei Guo, Jie Xue, Chong-De Lu, Jie Shi, Yan Meng, Shu-Qun Cheng, Wei-Xing Guo
{"title":"Radiofrequency ablation versus stereotactic body radiotherapy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter, propensity score matching analysis.","authors":"Zi-Hui Ma, Xiao-Lu Lin, Feng-Hua Liu, Jing-Lei Zhang, Mao-Lin Yan, Xing-Chao Song, Lei Guo, Jie Xue, Chong-De Lu, Jie Shi, Yan Meng, Shu-Qun Cheng, Wei-Xing Guo","doi":"10.1186/s12885-025-13800-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed at analyzing and comparing the clinical efficacy and prognosis of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Clinicopathological data of RHCC patients who underwent RFA or SBRT as treatment from three medical centers were retrospectively reviewed. The survival outcomes of patients who underwent SBRT were compared with those who underwent RFA. Using the Kaplan-Meier method, survival curves for the two groups of patients were generated, and the log-rank test was used to compare survival differences. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to match patients of the SBRT and RFA groups in a 1:1 ratio.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The SBRT group had a significantly better overall survival (OS) than the RFA group and no statistical differences were found in disease-free survival (DFS) in the two groups before and after PSM. After PSM, subgroup analysis demonstrated that, compared with the RFA group, the SBRT group had a significantly better OS in terms of tumor location in the subphrenic or subcapsular area, tumor size > 2.5 cm, and tumor proximity to major vessels ≤ 1 cm.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SBRT appears to be an effective priority to RFA for RHCC patients especially when RFA is not feasible due to tumor location, size, and proximity to major vessels.</p>","PeriodicalId":9131,"journal":{"name":"BMC Cancer","volume":"25 1","pages":"424"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11889815/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-025-13800-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed at analyzing and comparing the clinical efficacy and prognosis of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC).

Methods: Clinicopathological data of RHCC patients who underwent RFA or SBRT as treatment from three medical centers were retrospectively reviewed. The survival outcomes of patients who underwent SBRT were compared with those who underwent RFA. Using the Kaplan-Meier method, survival curves for the two groups of patients were generated, and the log-rank test was used to compare survival differences. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to match patients of the SBRT and RFA groups in a 1:1 ratio.

Results: The SBRT group had a significantly better overall survival (OS) than the RFA group and no statistical differences were found in disease-free survival (DFS) in the two groups before and after PSM. After PSM, subgroup analysis demonstrated that, compared with the RFA group, the SBRT group had a significantly better OS in terms of tumor location in the subphrenic or subcapsular area, tumor size > 2.5 cm, and tumor proximity to major vessels ≤ 1 cm.

Conclusions: SBRT appears to be an effective priority to RFA for RHCC patients especially when RFA is not feasible due to tumor location, size, and proximity to major vessels.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
射频消融与立体定向放射治疗复发性肝癌:一项多中心、倾向评分匹配分析。
目的:分析比较立体定向体放疗(SBRT)与射频消融(RFA)治疗复发性肝癌(RHCC)的临床疗效和预后。方法:回顾性分析三个医疗中心接受RFA或SBRT治疗的RHCC患者的临床病理资料。将接受SBRT的患者与接受RFA的患者的生存结果进行比较。采用Kaplan-Meier法生成两组患者的生存曲线,采用log-rank检验比较生存差异。使用倾向评分匹配(PSM)分析将SBRT组和RFA组患者按1:1的比例进行匹配。结果:SBRT组总生存期(OS)明显优于RFA组,两组PSM前后无病生存期(DFS)无统计学差异。PSM后,亚组分析显示,与RFA组相比,SBRT组在肿瘤位于膈下或包膜下区域、肿瘤大小> 2.5 cm、肿瘤靠近大血管≤1 cm方面的OS明显更好。结论:对于RHCC患者,SBRT似乎是RFA的有效优先选择,特别是当由于肿瘤的位置、大小和靠近主要血管而无法进行RFA时。
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
BMC Cancer
BMC Cancer 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.60%
发文量
1204
审稿时长
6.8 months
期刊介绍: BMC Cancer is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of cancer research, including the pathophysiology, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of cancers. The journal welcomes submissions concerning molecular and cellular biology, genetics, epidemiology, and clinical trials.
期刊最新文献
Health literacy, nutrition, complementary medicine and their associations with life satisfaction in cancer patients: a cross-sectional study. Adebrelimab plus chemotherapy as neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC): a single-center, phase II, single-arm, open-label clinical trial (ADENEO) protocol. Network pharmacology and molecular docking analysis on mechanisms of Euphorbia Lathyris L. seed in treating colorectal cancer. Clinical efficacy of HAIC combined with TACE in patients with unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Integration of Ki67 and Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value (PIV) into a predictive nomogram for pathologic complete response in triple-negative breast cancer : (Ki67 and inflammation in triple-negative breast cancer).
×
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:604180095
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