Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy versus Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

SIMPLE SUMMARY: In the lack of direct comparative evidence of stereotactic body radiation therapy, we reviewed one of the largest locally advanced pancreatic cancer cohort homogeneously treated in a tertiary cancer center. Our propensity score–matched analysis shows comparable outcomes between stere...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shin, Young Seob, Park, Hee Hyun, Park, Jin-hong, Seo, Dong-Wan, Lee, Sang Soo, Yoo, Changhoon, Kim, Seonok, Yoon, Sang Min, Jung, Jinhong, Kim, Myung-Hwan, Lee, Sung Koo, Park, Do Hyun, Song, Tae Jun, Oh, Dongwook, Ryoo, Baek-Yeol, Chang, Heung-Moon, Kim, Kyu-pyo, Jeong, Jae Ho, Kim, Jong Hoon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Article
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8909663/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35267485
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14051166
Descripción
Sumario:SIMPLE SUMMARY: In the lack of direct comparative evidence of stereotactic body radiation therapy, we reviewed one of the largest locally advanced pancreatic cancer cohort homogeneously treated in a tertiary cancer center. Our propensity score–matched analysis shows comparable outcomes between stereotactic body radiation therapy and concurrent chemoradiotherapy in terms of survival, local control, and treatment-related toxicities. Considering the advantages of SBRT such as short treatment duration, better tolerance, easy combination with systemic treatment, and the potential for dose escalation, further investigation of the feasibility of SBRT as an alternative to CCRT in treating locally advanced pancreatic cancer is required. ABSTRACT: In locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has been applied as an alternative to concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT); however, direct comparative evidence between these two modalities is scarce. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of SBRT with CCRT for LAPC. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with LAPC who received SBRT (n = 95) or CCRT (n = 66) with a concurrent 5-FU-based regimen between January 2008 and July 2016. The clinical outcomes of freedom from local progression (FFLP), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities were analyzed before and after propensity score (PS) matching. After a median follow-up duration of 15.5 months (range, 2.3–64.5), the median OS, PFS, and FFLP of the unmatched patients were 17.3 months, 11 months, and 19.6 months, respectively. After PS matching, there were no significant differences between the SBRT and CCRT groups in terms of the 1-year rates of OS (66.7% vs. 80%, p = 0.455), PFS (40.0% vs. 54.2%, p = 0.123), and FFLP (77.2% and 87.1%, p = 0.691). Our results suggest SBRT could be a feasible alternative to CCRT in treating patients with LAPC.

Ejemplares similares