非转移性可切除腹膜后肉瘤术前放化疗与单纯放化疗的比较

IF 0.3 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
S. Ma, B. Yu, Lucas M. Serra, A. Bartl, O. Oladeru, M. Farrugia, Rohil Shekher, A. Iovoli, F. Fekrmandi, Han Yu, Ashutosh Kumar Singh
{"title":"非转移性可切除腹膜后肉瘤术前放化疗与单纯放化疗的比较","authors":"S. Ma, B. Yu, Lucas M. Serra, A. Bartl, O. Oladeru, M. Farrugia, Rohil Shekher, A. Iovoli, F. Fekrmandi, Han Yu, Ashutosh Kumar Singh","doi":"10.1017/S1460396921000480","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Aim: Optimal preoperative therapy regimen in the treatment of resectable retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) remains unclear. This study compares the impact of preoperative radiation, chemoradiation and chemotherapy on overall survival (OS) in RPS patients. Materials and Methods: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients with non-metastatic, resectable RPS (2006–15). The primary endpoint was OS, evaluated by Kaplan–Meier method, log-rank test, Cox multivariable analysis and propensity score matching. Results: A total of 1,253 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 210 patients (17%) receiving chemoradiation, 850 patients (68%) receiving radiation and 193 patients (15%) receiving chemotherapy. On Cox multivariable analysis, when compared to preoperative chemoradiation, preoperative radiation was not associated with improved OS (hazards ratio [HR] 0·98, 95% CI 0·76–1·25, p = 0·84), while preoperative chemotherapy was associated with worse OS (HR 1·64, 95% CI 1·24–2·18, p < 0·001). Similar findings were observed in 199 and 128 matched pairs for preoperative radiation and chemotherapy, respectively, when compared to preoperative chemoradiation. Findings: Our study suggested an OS benefit in using preoperative chemoradiation compared to chemotherapy alone, but OS outcomes were comparable between preoperative chemoradiation and radiation alone.","PeriodicalId":44597,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of preoperative chemoradiation with radiation or chemotherapy alone in patients with non-metastatic, resectable retroperitoneal sarcoma\",\"authors\":\"S. Ma, B. Yu, Lucas M. Serra, A. Bartl, O. Oladeru, M. Farrugia, Rohil Shekher, A. Iovoli, F. Fekrmandi, Han Yu, Ashutosh Kumar Singh\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1460396921000480\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Aim: Optimal preoperative therapy regimen in the treatment of resectable retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) remains unclear. This study compares the impact of preoperative radiation, chemoradiation and chemotherapy on overall survival (OS) in RPS patients. Materials and Methods: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients with non-metastatic, resectable RPS (2006–15). The primary endpoint was OS, evaluated by Kaplan–Meier method, log-rank test, Cox multivariable analysis and propensity score matching. Results: A total of 1,253 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 210 patients (17%) receiving chemoradiation, 850 patients (68%) receiving radiation and 193 patients (15%) receiving chemotherapy. On Cox multivariable analysis, when compared to preoperative chemoradiation, preoperative radiation was not associated with improved OS (hazards ratio [HR] 0·98, 95% CI 0·76–1·25, p = 0·84), while preoperative chemotherapy was associated with worse OS (HR 1·64, 95% CI 1·24–2·18, p < 0·001). Similar findings were observed in 199 and 128 matched pairs for preoperative radiation and chemotherapy, respectively, when compared to preoperative chemoradiation. Findings: Our study suggested an OS benefit in using preoperative chemoradiation compared to chemotherapy alone, but OS outcomes were comparable between preoperative chemoradiation and radiation alone.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44597,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1460396921000480\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1460396921000480","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要目的:治疗可切除腹膜后肉瘤(RPS)的最佳术前治疗方案尚不清楚。本研究比较了术前放疗、放化疗和化疗对RPS患者总生存期(OS)的影响。材料和方法:对癌症国家数据库(NCDB)中的非肿瘤可切除RPS患者进行查询(2006-2015)。主要终点是OS,通过Kaplan–Meier方法、对数秩检验、Cox多变量分析和倾向评分匹配进行评估。结果:共有1253名患者符合纳入标准,其中210名患者(17%)接受了放化疗,850名患者(68%)接受了放疗,193名患者(15%)接受了化疗。Cox多变量分析显示,与术前放化疗相比,术前放放疗与OS改善无关(危险比[HR]0.98,95%CI0.76-1.25,p=0.04),而术前化疗与OS恶化有关(HR1.64,95%CI1.24-2.18,p<0.001)。与术前放化疗相比,在术前放疗和化疗的199对和128对配对中分别观察到了类似的结果。研究结果:我们的研究表明,与单独化疗相比,术前放化疗有OS益处,但术前放放疗和单独放疗的OS结果相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of preoperative chemoradiation with radiation or chemotherapy alone in patients with non-metastatic, resectable retroperitoneal sarcoma
Abstract Aim: Optimal preoperative therapy regimen in the treatment of resectable retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) remains unclear. This study compares the impact of preoperative radiation, chemoradiation and chemotherapy on overall survival (OS) in RPS patients. Materials and Methods: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients with non-metastatic, resectable RPS (2006–15). The primary endpoint was OS, evaluated by Kaplan–Meier method, log-rank test, Cox multivariable analysis and propensity score matching. Results: A total of 1,253 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 210 patients (17%) receiving chemoradiation, 850 patients (68%) receiving radiation and 193 patients (15%) receiving chemotherapy. On Cox multivariable analysis, when compared to preoperative chemoradiation, preoperative radiation was not associated with improved OS (hazards ratio [HR] 0·98, 95% CI 0·76–1·25, p = 0·84), while preoperative chemotherapy was associated with worse OS (HR 1·64, 95% CI 1·24–2·18, p < 0·001). Similar findings were observed in 199 and 128 matched pairs for preoperative radiation and chemotherapy, respectively, when compared to preoperative chemoradiation. Findings: Our study suggested an OS benefit in using preoperative chemoradiation compared to chemotherapy alone, but OS outcomes were comparable between preoperative chemoradiation and radiation alone.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice is a peer-reviewed journal covering all of the current modalities specific to clinical oncology and radiotherapy. The journal aims to publish research from a wide range of styles and encourage debate and the exchange of information and opinion from within the field of radiotherapy practice and clinical oncology. The journal also aims to encourage technical evaluations and case studies as well as equipment reviews that will be of interest to an international radiotherapy audience.
×
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