Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, Canada.
Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, Canada.
Radiother Oncol. 2019 May;134:55-66. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.01.019. Epub 2019 Feb 2.
While multifraction radiotherapy (RT) regimens (MFRT) have been considered the standard of care in patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) with limited prognosis, recent randomized evidence has demonstrated that single fraction RT (SFRT) may be equivalent in terms of functional and overall outcomes. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the effects of SFRT compared to short course MFRT in patients with MESCC.
A search of OVID, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to February 2018 was conducted. Randomized and prospective non-randomized trials comparing SFRT and short course MFRT for MESCC were included. Data were analyzed using a random effects model, and relative risks (RR) or hazard ratios (HR) were reported with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria.
Overall 1717 articles were reviewed. Three randomized trials were eligible for inclusion (n = 712 patients). The pooled treatment effect for SFRT versus MFRT with respect to motor response was RR = 0.96 (95% CI = 0.86-1.07, I = 19%), HR = 1.00 (95% CI = 0.88-1.13, I = 0%) for OS, and RR = 0.97, (95% CI = 0.85-1.11, I = 61%) for bladder function. There was insufficient data to perform a meta-analysis on quality of life, toxicity or pain response, however available information suggests pain response appears similar between SFRT and MFRT. Overall quality of evidence was deemed moderate due to risk of bias. There was no evidence of an observed difference with respect to motor response, bladder dysfunction and OS between SFRT and MFRT for MESCC in patients with a limited prognosis.
虽然多分割放疗(MFRT)方案已被认为是预后有限的转移性硬膜外脊髓压迫症(MESCC)患者的标准治疗方法,但最近的随机证据表明,单次分割放疗(SFRT)在功能和总体结果方面可能是等效的。进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,以确定 SFRT 与 MESCC 患者的短期 MFRT 相比的效果。
对 OVID、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库从成立到 2018 年 2 月进行了检索。纳入比较 SFRT 和短期 MFRT 治疗 MESCC 的随机和前瞻性非随机试验。使用随机效应模型分析数据,并报告相对风险(RR)或风险比(HR)以及相应的 95%置信区间(CI)。使用 GRADE 标准评估证据质量。
共回顾了 1717 篇文章。有 3 项随机试验符合纳入标准(n=712 例患者)。SFRT 与 MFRT 治疗 MESCC 患者的运动反应的汇总治疗效果为 RR=0.96(95%CI=0.86-1.07,I=19%),HR=1.00(95%CI=0.88-1.13,I=0%),OS,RR=0.97(95%CI=0.85-1.11,I=61%)用于膀胱功能。由于存在偏倚风险,因此没有足够的数据对生活质量、毒性或疼痛反应进行荟萃分析,但现有信息表明 SFRT 和 MFRT 之间的疼痛反应似乎相似。由于存在偏倚风险,因此没有足够的数据对生活质量、毒性或疼痛反应进行荟萃分析,但现有信息表明 SFRT 和 MFRT 之间的疼痛反应似乎相似。总体证据质量被认为是中等的。对于预后有限的 MESCC 患者,SFRT 与 MFRT 之间在运动反应、膀胱功能障碍和 OS 方面没有观察到差异的证据。
请注意,这只是一个机器翻译的结果,可能并不完全准确。