4.4 Article

Stereotactic Radiotherapy of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Preliminary Results

Journal

TECHNOLOGY IN CANCER RESEARCH & TREATMENT
Volume 9, Issue 5, Pages 479-487

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/153303461000900506

Keywords

Stereotactic radiation therapy; Hepatocellular carcinoma

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) offers a treatment option for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients that are not eligible for surgery, embolization, chemotherapy, or radiofrequency ablation. We have evaluated the feasibility, tolerance and toxicity of SRT for 25 HCC patients who were not eligible for these other modalities. The patients (6 women and 19 men) were treated with CyberKnife stereotactic radiotherapy using respiratory motion tracking. All patients had liver cirrhosis with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score of less than 2 and pre-treatment Child scores ranging from A5 to B9. A total dose of 45 Gy in three fractions of 15 Gy each was prescribed to the 80% isodose line (95% of the PTV received 45 Gy) and delivered to the target volume over 10 to 12 days. Overall the treatment was well tolerated with two Grade 3 acute toxicities and no acute Grade 4 toxicities. Late toxicity was minimal with all observed late toxicities occurring within the first six months of follow-up. Three hepatic recurrences at a distance from the target and one metastasis were observed. The actuarial 1- and 2-year local control rate was 95% (95% CI: 69-95%). At a median overall follow-up of 12,7 months (range, 1-24 months), six of the twenty-five (24%) patients have died. Overall actuarial survival at 1- and 2-years was 79% (95% CI: 52-92%) and 52% (95% CI: 19-78%), respectively. Our results suggest promising therapeutic efficacy and good clinical tolerance to CyberKnife SRT treatment for HCC patients not eligible for other treatment modalities.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available