Hyperfractionated Accelerated Radiotherapy Versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Limited-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Matched-Pair Analysis.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Lujie Yang, Xianfeng Lu, Jiamin Luo, Danju Huang, Xiaoyan Dai, Yuxin Yang, Nan Dai, Yanli Xiong
{"title":"Hyperfractionated Accelerated Radiotherapy Versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Limited-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Matched-Pair Analysis.","authors":"Lujie Yang, Xianfeng Lu, Jiamin Luo, Danju Huang, Xiaoyan Dai, Yuxin Yang, Nan Dai, Yanli Xiong","doi":"10.1097/COC.0000000000001066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Concurrent chemoradiotherapy based on hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (HART) is the first-line recommended regimen for the treatment of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). However, Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) is also regarded as an effective treatment for limited-stage (LS) SCLC, and the efficacy and safety of HART versus SBRT stay controversial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this study, 188 LS-SCLC patients were retrospectively divided into two groups receiving chemotherapy combined with either HART or SBRT. In HART group, patients received 4500 cGy in 30 fractions, administered twice daily for 3 weeks. Whereas in the SBRT group, a total radiation dose of 4000-4500 cGy was delivered in 10 fractions over 2 weeks. Thirty-three pairs of patients were finally included for next analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The estimated objective response rates were 63.6 % (21/33) and 78.8 % (26/33) in HART group and SBRT group, respectively (P = 0.269). Furthermore, there was no significant difference between HART and SBRT groups in overall survival (26 months vs. 29 months, P = 0.362) and progression free survival (11 months vs. 15 months, P = 0.223). As for the adverse events, toxicity of both groups is similar and slight that no grade 4 event was observed. Grade 3 pneumonitis cases were all occurred in the HART group (9.1%, 3/33, P = 0.238), and grade 3 esophagitis cases were all occurred in the SBRT group (6.1%, 2/33, P = 0.492).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with HART, SBRT could be another effective treatment with satisfactory safety for the concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with LS-SCLC.</p>","PeriodicalId":50812,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"115-121"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0000000000001066","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy based on hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (HART) is the first-line recommended regimen for the treatment of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). However, Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) is also regarded as an effective treatment for limited-stage (LS) SCLC, and the efficacy and safety of HART versus SBRT stay controversial.

Methods: In this study, 188 LS-SCLC patients were retrospectively divided into two groups receiving chemotherapy combined with either HART or SBRT. In HART group, patients received 4500 cGy in 30 fractions, administered twice daily for 3 weeks. Whereas in the SBRT group, a total radiation dose of 4000-4500 cGy was delivered in 10 fractions over 2 weeks. Thirty-three pairs of patients were finally included for next analysis.

Results: The estimated objective response rates were 63.6 % (21/33) and 78.8 % (26/33) in HART group and SBRT group, respectively (P = 0.269). Furthermore, there was no significant difference between HART and SBRT groups in overall survival (26 months vs. 29 months, P = 0.362) and progression free survival (11 months vs. 15 months, P = 0.223). As for the adverse events, toxicity of both groups is similar and slight that no grade 4 event was observed. Grade 3 pneumonitis cases were all occurred in the HART group (9.1%, 3/33, P = 0.238), and grade 3 esophagitis cases were all occurred in the SBRT group (6.1%, 2/33, P = 0.492).

Conclusion: Compared with HART, SBRT could be another effective treatment with satisfactory safety for the concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with LS-SCLC.

超分割加速放疗与立体定向体放疗在有限期小细胞肺癌治疗中的配对分析。
背景:基于超分割加速放疗(HART)的同步放化疗是治疗小细胞肺癌(SCLC)的一线推荐方案。然而,立体定向体放疗(SBRT)也被认为是一种有效的治疗有限期(LS) SCLC的方法,HART与SBRT的疗效和安全性仍存在争议。方法:本研究回顾性将188例LS-SCLC患者分为化疗联合HART或SBRT两组。在HART组,患者接受30份4500 cGy,每天两次,持续3周。而在SBRT组中,总辐射剂量为4000-4500 cGy,在2周内分10次给予。33对患者最终被纳入下一个分析。结果:HART组和SBRT组的客观有效率分别为63.6%(21/33)和78.8% (26/33)(P = 0.269)。此外,HART组和SBRT组在总生存期(26个月vs 29个月,P = 0.362)和无进展生存期(11个月vs 15个月,P = 0.223)方面无显著差异。两组毒副反应相似,毒性较轻,未见4级毒副反应。HART组3级肺炎病例全部发生(9.1%,3/33,P = 0.238), SBRT组3级食管炎病例全部发生(6.1%,2/33,P = 0.492)。结论:与HART相比,SBRT是LS-SCLC同步放化疗的另一种有效且安全性满意的治疗方法。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
130
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​American Journal of Clinical Oncology is a multidisciplinary journal for cancer surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, GYN oncologists, and pediatric oncologists. The emphasis of AJCO is on combined modality multidisciplinary loco-regional management of cancer. The journal also gives emphasis to translational research, outcome studies, and cost utility analyses, and includes opinion pieces and review articles. The editorial board includes a large number of distinguished surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, GYN oncologists, pediatric oncologists, and others who are internationally recognized for expertise in their fields.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信