Cargando…
Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a promising approach in treating painful bone metastases. However, the superiority of SBRT over conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) remains controversial. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled tri...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9472415/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36100905 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-022-02128-w |
_version_ | 1784789299810533376 |
---|---|
author | Ito, Kei Saito, Tetsuo Nakamura, Naoki Imano, Nobuki Hoskin, Peter |
author_facet | Ito, Kei Saito, Tetsuo Nakamura, Naoki Imano, Nobuki Hoskin, Peter |
author_sort | Ito, Kei |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a promising approach in treating painful bone metastases. However, the superiority of SBRT over conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) remains controversial. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was conducted to compare SBRT and cEBRT for the treatment of bone metastases. METHODS: A search was conducted using PubMed on January 22, 2022, with the following inclusion criteria: (i) randomised controlled trials comparing SBRT with cEBRT for bone metastases and (ii) endpoint including pain response. Effect sizes across studies were pooled using random-effects models in a meta-analysis of risk ratios. RESULTS: A total of 1246 articles were screened, with 7 articles comprising 964 patients (522 and 442 patients in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively) meeting the inclusion criteria. The overall pain response (OR) rates of bone metastases at 3 months were 45% and 36% in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively. The present analyses showed no significant difference between the two groups. In four studies included for the calculation of OR rates of spinal metastases at three months, the OR rates were 40% and 35% in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups. The incidence of severe adverse effects and health-related quality of life outcomes were comparable between the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: The superiority of SBRT over cEBRT for pain palliation in bone metastases was not confirmed in this meta-analysis. Although SBRT is a standard of care for bone metastases, patients receiving SBRT should be selected appropriately. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13014-022-02128-w. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9472415 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94724152022-09-15 Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Ito, Kei Saito, Tetsuo Nakamura, Naoki Imano, Nobuki Hoskin, Peter Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a promising approach in treating painful bone metastases. However, the superiority of SBRT over conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) remains controversial. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was conducted to compare SBRT and cEBRT for the treatment of bone metastases. METHODS: A search was conducted using PubMed on January 22, 2022, with the following inclusion criteria: (i) randomised controlled trials comparing SBRT with cEBRT for bone metastases and (ii) endpoint including pain response. Effect sizes across studies were pooled using random-effects models in a meta-analysis of risk ratios. RESULTS: A total of 1246 articles were screened, with 7 articles comprising 964 patients (522 and 442 patients in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively) meeting the inclusion criteria. The overall pain response (OR) rates of bone metastases at 3 months were 45% and 36% in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively. The present analyses showed no significant difference between the two groups. In four studies included for the calculation of OR rates of spinal metastases at three months, the OR rates were 40% and 35% in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups. The incidence of severe adverse effects and health-related quality of life outcomes were comparable between the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: The superiority of SBRT over cEBRT for pain palliation in bone metastases was not confirmed in this meta-analysis. Although SBRT is a standard of care for bone metastases, patients receiving SBRT should be selected appropriately. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13014-022-02128-w. BioMed Central 2022-09-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9472415/ /pubmed/36100905 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-022-02128-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Ito, Kei Saito, Tetsuo Nakamura, Naoki Imano, Nobuki Hoskin, Peter Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title | Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_full | Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_fullStr | Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_short | Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_sort | stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9472415/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36100905 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-022-02128-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT itokei stereotacticbodyradiotherapyversusconventionalradiotherapyforpainfulbonemetastasesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT saitotetsuo stereotacticbodyradiotherapyversusconventionalradiotherapyforpainfulbonemetastasesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT nakamuranaoki stereotacticbodyradiotherapyversusconventionalradiotherapyforpainfulbonemetastasesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT imanonobuki stereotacticbodyradiotherapyversusconventionalradiotherapyforpainfulbonemetastasesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT hoskinpeter stereotacticbodyradiotherapyversusconventionalradiotherapyforpainfulbonemetastasesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials |