...
首页> 外文期刊>Radiation oncology >Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional/moderate fractionated radiation therapy with androgen deprivation therapy for unfavorable risk prostate cancer
【24h】

Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional/moderate fractionated radiation therapy with androgen deprivation therapy for unfavorable risk prostate cancer

机译:对雄激素剥夺治疗不利风险前列腺癌的常规/中等分级放射治疗的立体定向体放射治疗

获取原文

摘要

Ultrahypofractionation using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an increasingly utilized technique for men with prostate cancer (PC). The comparative efficacy of SBRT plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) compared to fractionated radiotherapy (EBRT) plus ADT in higher-risk prostate cancer is unknown. Men ?40?years old with localized PC treated with external beam radiation and concomitant ADT for curative intent between 2004 and 2016 were analyzed from the National Cancer Database. Patients who lacked ADT or risk stratification data were excluded. 558 men treated with SBRT versus 40,797 men treated with conventional or moderately hypofractionated EBRT were included. Patients were stratified by unfavorable intermediate (UIR) and high (HR) risk using NCCN criteria. Kaplan Meier and Cox proportional hazards were used to compare overall survival (OS) between RT modality, adjusting for age, race, and comorbidity index. With a median follow up of 74?months, there was no difference in estimated 6-year OS between men treated with SBRT versus EBRT regardless of risk group. On multivariable analysis, there was no difference in risk of death for men treated with SBRT compared to EBRT (UIR: adjusted HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.68–1.74, p?=?.72; HR: adjusted HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.76–1.14, p?=?.51). On sensitivity analyses, when confining the cohort to men treated with NCCN-preferred dose fractionations, with no comorbidities, or??65?years old, there remained no survival difference between treatment groups for both UIR and HR. Within study limitations, we found no difference in survival between SBRT+ADT and standard of care EBRT+ADT for UIR or HR PC. These results support recent NCCN guideline updates, which include SBRT as a non-preferred option for higher risk men. Prospective validation would further strengthen the evidence basis behind these recommendations.
机译:使用立体定向体放射疗法(SBRT)的超空压分子是具有前列腺癌(PC)的男性越来越多的技术。与分级放射疗法(EBRT)加上较高风险的前列腺癌的分级放射治疗(EBRT)的比较疗效尚不清楚。男性> 40岁?从国家癌症数据库分析了2004年至2016年间用外梁辐射治疗的局部PC和伴随着治疗意图的局部PC。排除缺乏ADT或风险分层数据的患者。用SBRT治疗的558名男性,包括常规或中度低次杂交eBRT治疗的40,797名男性。使用NCCN标准,通过不利的中间体(UIR)和高(HR)风险来分层。 Kaplan Meier和Cox比例危害用于比较RT模态之间的整体存活(OS),调整年龄,种族和合并症指数。随着74个月的中位数,几个月,估计的6年度患有SBRT与EBRT之间的6年的OS没有差异,无论风险群体如何。在多变量分析上,与EBRT相比,用SBRT治疗的男性死亡风险没有差异(UIR:调整后的HR 1.09,95%CI 0.68-1.74,P?= 72; HR:调整后HR 0.93,95%CI 0.76-1.14,p?= 51)。关于敏感性分析,当与NCCN优选的剂量分馏治疗的群组,没有合并症,或者?<?65?岁,治疗组对UIR和HR的治疗组之间仍然没有生存差异。在研究限制内,我们发现SBRT + ADT和护理标准的生存差异和UIR或HR PC的护理eBRT + ADT。这些结果支持最近的NCCN指南更新,包括SBRT作为更高风险男性的非优选选项。前瞻性验证将进一步加强这些建议背后的证据。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号