Tobias Engel Ayer Botrel, Otávio Clark, Antônio Carlos Lima Pompeo, Francisco Flávio Horta Bretas, Marcus Vinicius Sadi, Ubirajara Ferreira, Rodolfo Borges Dos Reis
{"title":"低分割外束放射治疗(HEBRT)与常规外束放射治疗(CEBRT)在局限性前列腺癌患者中的应用:一项系统综述和荟萃分析","authors":"Tobias Engel Ayer Botrel, Otávio Clark, Antônio Carlos Lima Pompeo, Francisco Flávio Horta Bretas, Marcus Vinicius Sadi, Ubirajara Ferreira, Rodolfo Borges Dos Reis","doi":"10.2147/CE.S41178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this work was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and side effect profile of hypofractionated versus conventional external-beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Several databases were searched, including Medline, EmBase, LiLACS, and Central. The endpoints were freedom from biochemical failure and side effects. We performed a meta-analysis of the published data. The results are expressed as the hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR), with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final analysis included nine trials comprising 2702 patients. Freedom from biochemical failure was reported in only three studies and was similar in patients who received hypofractionated or conventional radiotherapy (fixed effect, HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.88-1.20; P = 0.75), with heterogeneity [χ(2) = 15.32, df = 2 (P = 0.0005); I2 = 87%]. The incidence of acute adverse gastrointestinal events was higher in the hypofractionated group (fixed effect, RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.45-2.81; P < 0.0001). We also found moderate heterogeneity on this analysis [χ(2) = 7.47, df = 5 (P = 0.19); I2 = 33%]. Acute genitourinary toxicity was similar among the groups (fixed effect, RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.95-1.49; P = 0.13), with moderate heterogeneity [χ(2) = 5.83, df = 4 (P = 0.21); I2 = 31%]. The incidence of all late adverse events was the same in both groups (fixed effect, gastrointestinal toxicity, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.79-1.72, P = 0.44; and acute genitourinary toxicity, RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.80-1.68, P = 0.44).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Hypofractionated radiotherapy in localized prostate cancer was not superior to conventional radiotherapy and showed higher acute gastrointestinal toxicity in this meta-analysis. Because the number of published studies is still small, future assessments should be conducted to clarify better the true role of hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients with prostate cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":10764,"journal":{"name":"Core Evidence","volume":"8 ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2147/CE.S41178","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hypofractionated external-beam radiation therapy (HEBRT) versus conventional external-beam radiation (CEBRT) in patients with localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Tobias Engel Ayer Botrel, Otávio Clark, Antônio Carlos Lima Pompeo, Francisco Flávio Horta Bretas, Marcus Vinicius Sadi, Ubirajara Ferreira, Rodolfo Borges Dos Reis\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/CE.S41178\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this work was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and side effect profile of hypofractionated versus conventional external-beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Several databases were searched, including Medline, EmBase, LiLACS, and Central. The endpoints were freedom from biochemical failure and side effects. We performed a meta-analysis of the published data. The results are expressed as the hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR), with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final analysis included nine trials comprising 2702 patients. Freedom from biochemical failure was reported in only three studies and was similar in patients who received hypofractionated or conventional radiotherapy (fixed effect, HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.88-1.20; P = 0.75), with heterogeneity [χ(2) = 15.32, df = 2 (P = 0.0005); I2 = 87%]. The incidence of acute adverse gastrointestinal events was higher in the hypofractionated group (fixed effect, RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.45-2.81; P < 0.0001). We also found moderate heterogeneity on this analysis [χ(2) = 7.47, df = 5 (P = 0.19); I2 = 33%]. Acute genitourinary toxicity was similar among the groups (fixed effect, RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.95-1.49; P = 0.13), with moderate heterogeneity [χ(2) = 5.83, df = 4 (P = 0.21); I2 = 31%]. The incidence of all late adverse events was the same in both groups (fixed effect, gastrointestinal toxicity, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.79-1.72, P = 0.44; and acute genitourinary toxicity, RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.80-1.68, P = 0.44).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Hypofractionated radiotherapy in localized prostate cancer was not superior to conventional radiotherapy and showed higher acute gastrointestinal toxicity in this meta-analysis. Because the number of published studies is still small, future assessments should be conducted to clarify better the true role of hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients with prostate cancer.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10764,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Core Evidence\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2147/CE.S41178\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Core Evidence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/CE.S41178\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2013/3/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Core Evidence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/CE.S41178","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/3/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20
摘要
背景:本研究的目的是对所有随机对照试验进行系统回顾和荟萃分析,比较低分割与常规外束放射治疗前列腺癌的疗效和副作用。方法:检索Medline、EmBase、LiLACS、Central等数据库。终点是没有生化失败和副作用。我们对发表的数据进行了荟萃分析。结果用风险比(HR)或风险比(RR)表示,并给出相应的95%置信区间(CI)。结果:最终分析包括9项试验,2702例患者。只有3项研究报告了生化失败的自由,在接受低分割或常规放疗的患者中也有类似的情况(固定效应,HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.88-1.20;P = 0.75),异质性[χ(2) = 15.32, df = 2 (P = 0.0005);I2 = 87%]。急性胃肠道不良事件的发生率在低分割组较高(固定效应,RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.45-2.81;P < 0.0001)。我们还发现该分析存在中度异质性[χ(2) = 7.47, df = 5 (P = 0.19);I2 = 33%]。两组间急性泌尿生殖系统毒性相似(固定效应,RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.95-1.49;P = 0.13),异质性中等[χ(2) = 5.83, df = 4 (P = 0.21);I2 = 31%]。两组的所有晚期不良事件发生率相同(固定效应,胃肠道毒性,RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.79-1.72, P = 0.44;急性泌尿生殖系统毒性,RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.80-1.68, P = 0.44)。结论:在本荟萃分析中,低分割放疗治疗局限性前列腺癌并不优于常规放疗,而且显示出更高的急性胃肠道毒性。由于已发表的研究数量仍然很少,未来的评估应该进行,以更好地阐明低分割放疗在前列腺癌患者中的真正作用。
Hypofractionated external-beam radiation therapy (HEBRT) versus conventional external-beam radiation (CEBRT) in patients with localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: The purpose of this work was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and side effect profile of hypofractionated versus conventional external-beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer.
Methods: Several databases were searched, including Medline, EmBase, LiLACS, and Central. The endpoints were freedom from biochemical failure and side effects. We performed a meta-analysis of the published data. The results are expressed as the hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR), with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).
Results: The final analysis included nine trials comprising 2702 patients. Freedom from biochemical failure was reported in only three studies and was similar in patients who received hypofractionated or conventional radiotherapy (fixed effect, HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.88-1.20; P = 0.75), with heterogeneity [χ(2) = 15.32, df = 2 (P = 0.0005); I2 = 87%]. The incidence of acute adverse gastrointestinal events was higher in the hypofractionated group (fixed effect, RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.45-2.81; P < 0.0001). We also found moderate heterogeneity on this analysis [χ(2) = 7.47, df = 5 (P = 0.19); I2 = 33%]. Acute genitourinary toxicity was similar among the groups (fixed effect, RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.95-1.49; P = 0.13), with moderate heterogeneity [χ(2) = 5.83, df = 4 (P = 0.21); I2 = 31%]. The incidence of all late adverse events was the same in both groups (fixed effect, gastrointestinal toxicity, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.79-1.72, P = 0.44; and acute genitourinary toxicity, RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.80-1.68, P = 0.44).
Conclusion: Hypofractionated radiotherapy in localized prostate cancer was not superior to conventional radiotherapy and showed higher acute gastrointestinal toxicity in this meta-analysis. Because the number of published studies is still small, future assessments should be conducted to clarify better the true role of hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients with prostate cancer.
期刊介绍:
Core Evidence evaluates the evidence underlying the potential place in therapy of drugs throughout their development lifecycle from preclinical to postlaunch. The focus of each review is to evaluate the case for a new drug or class in outcome terms in specific indications and patient groups The emerging evidence on new drugs is reviewed at key stages of development and evaluated against unmet needs