Hypofractionated Palliative Radiotherapy for Relapsed and Refractory High-Risk Neuroblastoma.

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Ellery Koelker-Wolfe, Karen J Marcus, Steven G DuBois, Paul J Catalano, Suzanne Shusterman, Myrsini Ioakeim-Ioannidou, Hesham Elhalawani, Torunn I Yock, Shannon M MacDonald, Daphne A Haas-Kogan, Kevin X Liu
{"title":"Hypofractionated Palliative Radiotherapy for Relapsed and Refractory High-Risk Neuroblastoma.","authors":"Ellery Koelker-Wolfe, Karen J Marcus, Steven G DuBois, Paul J Catalano, Suzanne Shusterman, Myrsini Ioakeim-Ioannidou, Hesham Elhalawani, Torunn I Yock, Shannon M MacDonald, Daphne A Haas-Kogan, Kevin X Liu","doi":"10.3390/curroncol32030124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> While palliative radiotherapy (RT) is frequently used in the management of relapsed/refractory high-risk neuroblastoma (HR-NBL); outcomes after palliative hypofractionated RT (hypo-RT) remain poorly characterized. <b>Methods</b>: We conducted a multi-institutional retrospective study of 38 patients who were diagnosed with HR-NBL between 1997 and 2021 and received palliative RT. Conventional RT (conv-RT) and hypo-RT were defined as palliative treatment courses using dose ≤2 or >2 Gy per fraction, respectively. The primary outcome was cumulative incidence of in-field progression using Gray's test. Univariate analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. <b>Results</b>: When analyzing by first course of palliative RT, 16 patients received conventionally fractionated RT (43%) and 21 received hypo-RT (57%). Clinical characteristics were similar between the two groups. With a median follow-up of 10.3 months (range: 0.3-104.0), the cumulative incidence of in-field progression was not statistically significantly different between hypo-RT and conv-RT (30% vs. 20% at 10 months; <i>p</i> = 0.80). Clinical response, defined as symptomatic improvement or decrease in the size of the lesion, was not statistically different between the two groups (92% conv-RT vs. 90% hypo-RT; <i>p</i> = 1.00). No grade ≥4 toxicities were observed. On univariate analysis, hypo-RT (HR 1.50; 95% CI 0.47-4.76; <i>p</i> = 0.493) was not statistically significantly associated with time to in-field progression, but <i>MYCN</i> amplification was associated with significantly longer time to in-field progression (HR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.05-0.77; <i>p</i> = 0.020). <b>Conclusions</b>: We found no statistically significant difference in cumulative incidence of in-field progression and clinical outcomes between the conv-RT and hypo-RT groups. Palliative hypo-RT can be considered for relapsed/refractory HR-NBL, especially when shorter treatments may offer improved quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":11012,"journal":{"name":"Current oncology","volume":"32 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11941608/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol32030124","RegionNum":4,"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

Introduction: While palliative radiotherapy (RT) is frequently used in the management of relapsed/refractory high-risk neuroblastoma (HR-NBL); outcomes after palliative hypofractionated RT (hypo-RT) remain poorly characterized. Methods: We conducted a multi-institutional retrospective study of 38 patients who were diagnosed with HR-NBL between 1997 and 2021 and received palliative RT. Conventional RT (conv-RT) and hypo-RT were defined as palliative treatment courses using dose ≤2 or >2 Gy per fraction, respectively. The primary outcome was cumulative incidence of in-field progression using Gray's test. Univariate analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: When analyzing by first course of palliative RT, 16 patients received conventionally fractionated RT (43%) and 21 received hypo-RT (57%). Clinical characteristics were similar between the two groups. With a median follow-up of 10.3 months (range: 0.3-104.0), the cumulative incidence of in-field progression was not statistically significantly different between hypo-RT and conv-RT (30% vs. 20% at 10 months; p = 0.80). Clinical response, defined as symptomatic improvement or decrease in the size of the lesion, was not statistically different between the two groups (92% conv-RT vs. 90% hypo-RT; p = 1.00). No grade ≥4 toxicities were observed. On univariate analysis, hypo-RT (HR 1.50; 95% CI 0.47-4.76; p = 0.493) was not statistically significantly associated with time to in-field progression, but MYCN amplification was associated with significantly longer time to in-field progression (HR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.05-0.77; p = 0.020). Conclusions: We found no statistically significant difference in cumulative incidence of in-field progression and clinical outcomes between the conv-RT and hypo-RT groups. Palliative hypo-RT can be considered for relapsed/refractory HR-NBL, especially when shorter treatments may offer improved quality of life.

复发和难治性高危神经母细胞瘤的低分割姑息放疗。
简介:虽然姑息性放射治疗(RT)经常被用于治疗复发/难治性高危神经母细胞瘤(HR-NBL),但姑息性低分次RT(hypo-RT)的疗效仍不尽如人意。研究方法我们对1997年至2021年间确诊为HR-NBL并接受姑息性RT治疗的38名患者进行了一项多机构回顾性研究。常规RT(conv-RT)和低RT分别定义为每分剂量≤2 Gy或>2 Gy的姑息治疗疗程。主要结果是使用格雷氏检验的场内进展累积发生率。采用Cox比例危险模型进行单变量分析。分析结果根据姑息性 RT 的首个疗程进行分析,16 例患者接受了常规分次 RT(43%),21 例患者接受了低分次 RT(57%)。两组患者的临床特征相似。中位随访时间为10.3个月(范围:0.3-104.0),hypo-RT和conv-RT的病灶内进展累积发生率在统计学上无显著差异(10个月时分别为30%和20%;P = 0.80)。临床反应(定义为症状改善或病灶缩小)在两组之间无统计学差异(92% conv-RT vs. 90% hypo-RT;p = 1.00)。没有观察到≥4级的毒性反应。单变量分析显示,hypo-RT(HR 1.50;95% CI 0.47-4.76;p = 0.493)与场内进展时间无显著统计学相关性,但 MYCN 扩增与场内进展时间显著延长相关(HR:0.20;95% CI:0.05-0.77;p = 0.020)。结论我们发现,conv-RT组和hypo-RT组之间的场内进展累积发生率和临床结局无统计学差异。对于复发/难治性HR-NBL,可以考虑姑息性低RT,尤其是当短期治疗可以提高生活质量时。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Current oncology
Current oncology ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
664
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Current Oncology is a peer-reviewed, Canadian-based and internationally respected journal. Current Oncology represents a multidisciplinary medium encompassing health care workers in the field of cancer therapy in Canada to report upon and to review progress in the management of this disease. We encourage submissions from all fields of cancer medicine, including radiation oncology, surgical oncology, medical oncology, pediatric oncology, pathology, and cancer rehabilitation and survivorship. Articles published in the journal typically contain information that is relevant directly to clinical oncology practice, and have clear potential for application to the current or future practice of cancer medicine.
×
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