4.7 Article

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Oligometastases to the Lung: A Phase 2 Study

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.10.021

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To assess, in a phase 2 study, the efficacy and toxicity of stereotactic body radiation therapy for oligometastases to the lung in inoperable patients. Methods and Materials: Patients with lung metastases were included in this study if (1) the primary tumor was controlled; (2) patients were ineligible for or refused surgery and chemotherapy; and (3) patients had 5 or fewer metastatic lesions in no more than 2 organs. Large peripheral tumors were treated with a dose of 60 Gy (3 fractions), small peripheral tumors with 30 Gy (1 fraction), central tumors received 60 Gy (5 fractions), and mediastinal tumors or tumors close to the esophagus received 56 Gy (7 fractions). Results: Thirty patients with 57 metastatic lung tumors from various primary cancers were analyzed. The median follow-up was 36 months (range, 4-60 months). At 2 years, local control for the 11 central tumors was 100%, for the 23 peripheral tumors treated to 60 Gy it was 91%, and for the 23 tumors treated in a single 30-Gy fraction it was 74% (P=. 13). This resulted in an overall local control rate at 1 year of 79%, with a 2-sided 80% confidence interval of 67% to 87%. Because the hypothesized value of 70% lies within the confidence interval, we cannot reject the hypothesis that the true local control rate at 1 year is <= 70%, and therefore we did not achieve the goal of the study: an actuarial local control of the treated lung lesions at 1 year of 90%. The 4-year overall survival rate was 38%. Grade 3 acute toxicity occurred in 5 patients. Three patients complained of chronic grade 3 toxicity, including pain, fatigue, and pneumonitis, and 3 patients had rib fractures. Conclusions: The local control was promising, and the 4-year overall survival rate was 38%. The treatment was well tolerated, even for central lesions. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据