关于介入性放射治疗在肛管鳞状细胞癌治疗中的作用的系统评价：多模式和多学科治疗方法。
A systematic review on the role of interventional radiotherapy for treatment of anal squamous cell cancer: multimodal and multidisciplinary therapeutic approach.
作者信息
Campisi Maria Concetta, Lancellotta Valentina, Fionda Bruno, De Angeli Martina, Manfrida Stefania, Cornacchione Patrizia, Macchia Gabriella, Morganti Alessio Giuseppe, Mattiucci Gian Carlo, Gambacorta Maria Antonietta, Iezzi Roberto, Tagliaferri Luca
机构信息
U.O.C. Radioterapia Oncologica, Ospedale Maria Paternò Arezzo, Ragusa, Italy.
UOC Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento Di Diagnostica Per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica Ed Ematologia,, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
出版信息
Radiol Med. 2024 Dec;129(12):1739-1750. doi: 10.1007/s11547-024-01896-7. Epub 2024 Oct 25.
BACKGROUND
Aim was to compare the efficacy of interventional radiotherapy (IRT) boost vs. external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) boost after chemoradiation (CCRT) in patients with anal cancer (AC).
METHODS
The P.I.C.O. framework was: in patients with AC [P], is IRT boost [I] superior to EBRT boost [C] in terms of local control (LC), cancer specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), distant meta-static free Survival (DMFS), colostomy free survival (CFS) and toxicity [O]?
RESULTS
651 patients were analyzed. The median 5-year locoregional control rates was 87.8% in the IRT boost group versus 72.8% in the EBRT boost group. The 5-year cancer-specific survival rate was 91% in the IRT boost group versus 78% in the EBRT boost group. 5-years overall survival was 74.6% in IRT boost versus 67.7% in the EBRT boost. 5-years disease metastasis-free survival rate was 92.9% in IRT boost group vs. 85.6% for the EBRT boost group. Cancer-free survival rate was 76.8% in the IRT group vs. 63.1% in the EBRT boost group. Acute toxicity above grade 2 was less common in the IRT boost group while chronic toxicity was similar between both groups.
CONCLUSION
IRT boost after CCRT could lead to better outcomes than EBRT boost in treating AC.
背景
目的是比较肛管癌（AC）患者同步放化疗（CCRT）后介入放射治疗（IRT）增敏与外照射放疗（EBRT）增敏的疗效。
方法
PICO框架为：在AC患者中[P]，IRT增敏[I]在局部控制（LC）、癌症特异性生存（CSS）、总生存（OS）、无远处转移生存（DMFS）、无结肠造口生存（CFS）和毒性[O]方面是否优于EBRT增敏[C]？
结果
分析了651例患者。IRT增敏组的5年局部区域控制率中位数为87.8%，而EBRT增敏组为72.8%。IRT增敏组的5年癌症特异性生存率为91%，EBRT增敏组为78%。IRT增敏组的5年总生存率为74.6%，EBRT增敏组为67.7%。IRT增敏组的5年无疾病转移生存率为92.9%，EBRT增敏组为85.6%。IRT组的无癌生存率为76.8%，EBRT增敏组为63.1%。IRT增敏组2级以上急性毒性较少见，而两组慢性毒性相似。
结论
CCRT后IRT增敏在治疗AC方面可能比EBRT增敏产生更好的结果。
Zotero 插件