Tsao May N, Mehta Minesh P, Whelan Timothy J, Morris David E, Hayman James A, Flickinger John C, Mills Michael, Rogers C Leland, Souhami Luis
The American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Fairfax, VA 22033, USA.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005 Sep 1;63(1):47-55. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.05.024.
To systematically review the evidence for the use of stereotactic radiosurgery or stereotactic fractionated radiation therapy in adult patients with malignant glioma.
Key clinical questions to be addressed in this evidence-based review were identified. Outcomes considered were overall survival, quality of life or symptom control, brain tumor control or response and toxicity. MEDLINE (1990-2004 June Week 2), CANCERLIT (1990-2003), CINAHL (1990-2004 June Week 2), EMBASE (1990-2004 Week 25), and the Cochrane library (2004 issue 2) databases were searched using OVID. In addition, the Physician Data Query clinical trials database, the proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (1997-2004), ASTRO (1997-2004), and the European Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO) (1997-2003) were searched. Data from the literature search were reviewed and tabulated. This process included an assessment of the level of evidence.
For patients with newly diagnosed malignant glioma, radiosurgery as boost therapy with conventional external beam radiation was examined in one randomized trial, five prospective cohort studies, and seven retrospective series. There is Level I evidence that the use of radiosurgery boost followed by external beam radiotherapy and carmustine (BCNU) does not confer benefit with respect to overall survival, quality of life, or patterns of failure as compared with external beam radiotherapy and BCNU. There is Level I-III evidence of toxicity associated with radiosurgery boost as compared with external beam radiotherapy alone. The results of the prospective and retrospective studies may be influenced by selection bias. Radiosurgery used as salvage for recurrent or progressive malignant glioma after conventional external beam radiotherapy failure was reported in zero randomized trials, three prospective cohort studies, and five retrospective series. The available data are sparse and insufficient to make absolute recommendations. Stereotactic fractionated radiation therapy has been reported as boost therapy with external beam radiotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed malignant glioma in only three prospective studies. As primary therapy alone without conventional external beam radiotherapy for newly diagnosed malignant glioma patients, stereotactic fractionated radiation therapy has been reported in only one prospective study. There were only three prospective series and two retrospective studies reported for patients with recurrent or progressive malignant glioma.
For patients with malignant glioma, there is Level I-III evidence that the use of radiosurgery boost followed by external beam radiotherapy and BCNU does not confer benefit in terms of overall survival, local brain control, or quality of life as compared with external beam radiotherapy and BCNU. The use of radiosurgery boost is associated with increased toxicity. For patients with malignant glioma, there is insufficient evidence regarding the benefits/harms of using radiosurgery at the time progression or recurrence. There is also insufficient evidence regarding the benefits/harms in the use of stereotactic fractionated radiation therapy for patients with newly diagnosed or progressive/recurrent malignant glioma.
系统评价立体定向放射外科或立体定向分次放射治疗在成年恶性胶质瘤患者中的应用证据。
确定了本循证综述中要解决的关键临床问题。所考虑的结局包括总生存期、生活质量或症状控制、脑肿瘤控制或反应以及毒性。使用OVID检索MEDLINE(1990 - 2004年第2周)、CANCERLIT(1990 - 2003年)、CINAHL(1990 - 2004年第2周)、EMBASE(1990 - 2004年第25周)以及Cochrane图书馆(2004年第2期)数据库。此外,还检索了医师数据查询临床试验数据库、美国临床肿瘤学会会议记录(1997 - 2004年)、美国放射肿瘤学会(1997 - 2004年)以及欧洲放射治疗与肿瘤学会(ESTRO)(1997 - 2003年)。对文献检索得到的数据进行审查并制成表格。该过程包括对证据水平的评估。
对于新诊断的恶性胶质瘤患者,在一项随机试验、五项前瞻性队列研究和七项回顾性系列研究中对立体定向放射外科作为常规外照射放疗的辅助治疗进行了研究。有I级证据表明,与外照射放疗及卡莫司汀(BCNU)相比,采用立体定向放射外科辅助治疗后再进行外照射放疗及BCNU在总生存期、生活质量或失败模式方面并无益处。与单纯外照射放疗相比,有I - III级证据表明立体定向放射外科辅助治疗存在毒性。前瞻性和回顾性研究的结果可能受到选择偏倚的影响。在零项随机试验、三项前瞻性队列研究和五项回顾性系列研究中报告了立体定向放射外科用于常规外照射放疗失败后复发或进展性恶性胶质瘤的挽救治疗。现有数据稀少,不足以做出绝对推荐。仅在三项前瞻性研究中报告了立体定向分次放射治疗作为新诊断恶性胶质瘤患者外照射放疗的辅助治疗。对于新诊断的恶性胶质瘤患者,仅在一项前瞻性研究中报告了立体定向分次放射治疗作为单独的初始治疗而不进行常规外照射放疗。对于复发或进展性恶性胶质瘤患者,仅报告了三项前瞻性系列研究和两项回顾性研究。
对于恶性胶质瘤患者,有I - III级证据表明,与外照射放疗及BCNU相比,采用立体定向放射外科辅助治疗后再进行外照射放疗及BCNU在总生存期、局部脑控制或生活质量方面并无益处。立体定向放射外科辅助治疗与毒性增加相关。对于恶性胶质瘤患者,关于疾病进展或复发时使用立体定向放射外科的利弊证据不足。关于新诊断或进展性/复发性恶性胶质瘤患者使用立体定向分次放射治疗的利弊证据也不足。