Is There a Role for Hypofractionated Thoracic Radiation Therapy in Limited-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer? A Propensity Score Matched Analysis.
Aged
Brain Neoplasms
/ prevention & control
Chemoradiotherapy
Cranial Irradiation
Dose Fractionation, Radiation
Esophagus
/ radiation effects
Female
Humans
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Logistic Models
Lung
/ radiation effects
Lung Neoplasms
/ mortality
Male
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Staging
Progression-Free Survival
Propensity Score
Radiation Dose Hypofractionation
Radiation Injuries
/ etiology
Retrospective Studies
Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
/ mortality
Smoking
Journal
International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics
ISSN: 1879-355X
Titre abrégé: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7603616
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 11 2020
01 11 2020
Historique:
received:
19
02
2020
revised:
07
06
2020
accepted:
08
06
2020
pubmed:
17
6
2020
medline:
10
4
2021
entrez:
17
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Various radiation schedules are used in concurrent chemoradiation therapy for limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC). Since there is currently no randomized evidence comparing hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) and conventionally fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT), the aim of this study was to compare overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity of HFRT and CFRT in LS-SCLC. Patients with LS-SCLC treated between 2000 and 2013 with HFRT (40 Gy/15 fractions, 45 Gy/15 fractions, 45 Gy/20 fractions) or CFRT (60 Gy/30 or 66 Gy/33 fractions) were included. Propensity scores were generated using a multivariable logistic regression model. Patients were matched on a 1:1 ratio with a caliper distance of 0.20. OS and PFS were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests. As a sensitivity analysis, univariable and multivariable Cox regression was performed including all patients without matching. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of pulmonary and esophageal adverse events. In the overall group of 117 patients, there were significant baseline differences between the HFRT and CFRT cohorts. Patients who received CFRT were older, more often smoked concurrently with treatment, had higher Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, different T and N stage patterns, and more commonly received concurrent chemoradiation therapy and prophylactic cranial irradiation. After propensity score matching for these differences, 72 patients were included, 36 in the HFRT and CFRT cohorts, respectively. There was no difference in OS (P = .724), PFS (P = .862), or any pulmonary (P = .350) or esophageal (P = .097) adverse events between cohorts. Skin adverse events were significantly higher for CFRT (41.7%) compared with HFRT (16.7%, P = .020). Multivariable Cox regression also revealed no differences in OS (P = .886) or PFS (P = .717) between all HFRT and CFRT patients, without matching. No grade 5 adverse events were observed. In LS-SCLC patients, HFRT was associated with comparable survival and toxicity outcomes and may be considered as an alternative to CFRT, should its efficacy be confirmed in prospective studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32544575
pii: S0360-3016(20)31249-9
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.06.008
pmc: PMC7293491
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
575-586Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Crown Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
N Engl J Med. 1999 Aug 12;341(7):476-84
pubmed: 10441603
World Health Stat Q. 1988;41(1):32-6
pubmed: 3376487
J Clin Epidemiol. 2001 Apr;54(4):387-98
pubmed: 11297888
N Engl J Med. 1999 Jan 28;340(4):265-71
pubmed: 9920950
Stat Med. 2007 Feb 20;26(4):734-53
pubmed: 16708349
Stat Med. 2008 May 30;27(12):2037-49
pubmed: 18038446
Radiother Oncol. 2010 Jul;96(1):78-83
pubmed: 20542346
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2017 Dec;29(12):811-813
pubmed: 28935186
J Clin Oncol. 2003 Apr 15;21(8):1544-9
pubmed: 12697879
Clin Lung Cancer. 2005 May;6(6):355-60
pubmed: 15943896
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Jul 20;25(21):3124-9
pubmed: 17634491
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Mar 1;91(3):517-23
pubmed: 25481679
N Engl J Med. 1992 Dec 3;327(23):1618-24
pubmed: 1331787
Biom J. 2009 Feb;51(1):171-84
pubmed: 19197955
N Engl J Med. 2007 Aug 16;357(7):664-72
pubmed: 17699816
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Aug;18(8):1116-1125
pubmed: 28642008
Oncologist. 2011;16(12):1784-92
pubmed: 22135122
J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 May;59(5):437-47
pubmed: 16632131
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003 Nov 1;57(3):709-16
pubmed: 14529775
Ann Oncol. 2002 May;13(5):748-54
pubmed: 12075744
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Jan 24;69(3):345-357
pubmed: 28104076
J Thorac Oncol. 2013 Aug;8(8):1043-9
pubmed: 23715301
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2020 May - Jun;10(3):158-173
pubmed: 32222430
Radiat Oncol. 2017 Mar 11;12(1):51
pubmed: 28283034
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Dec 5;99(23):1753-67
pubmed: 18042932
J Clin Oncol. 1993 Feb;11(2):336-44
pubmed: 8381164
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 Jun 1;59(2):460-8
pubmed: 15145163
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Aug 1;4(8):e174504
pubmed: 29302695
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007 Nov;134(5):1128-35
pubmed: 17976439
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2008 Dec;17(12):1218-25
pubmed: 18972455
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 Jul 15;59(4):943-51
pubmed: 15234027
J Clin Oncol. 1992 Nov;10(11):1819-20
pubmed: 1328553
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Jun 1;65(2):466-73
pubmed: 16563653
Cancer Radiother. 2017 Apr;21(2):89-98
pubmed: 28325618
Radiat Oncol. 2018 Apr 25;13(1):77
pubmed: 29695273
Acta Oncol. 2016 May;55(5):591-7
pubmed: 26494411
Curr Oncol. 2016 Jun;23(3):184-95
pubmed: 27330347
Stat Med. 2006 Jun 30;25(12):2084-106
pubmed: 16220490
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Dec 20;33(36):4240-6
pubmed: 26481366
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2013 Feb;57(1):105-12
pubmed: 23374562
Med Phys. 2008 Jan;35(1):112-8
pubmed: 18293568
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Mar 1;24(7):1057-63
pubmed: 16505424