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
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":"","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.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
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.
×
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