Jang Kevin, Cross Shamira, Yeghiaian-Alvandi Roland
Department of Radiation Oncology, Nepean Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Nepean Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Radiother Oncol. 2025 Jul;208:110898. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2025.110898. Epub 2025 Apr 20.
There is paucity of data for thoracic in-field reirradiation with two courses of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). This meta-analysis evaluates the safety and efficacy of repeat SABR as salvage therapy for in-field failures after definitive SABR.
A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if they involved adult patients treated with salvage SABR for in-field recurrences of lung cancer following prior SABR. To address varying definitions of local failure, studies were included if recurrence occurred within the original planning target volume (PTV). Studies with out-of-field failures (>1 cm from PTV) or those using non-SABR techniques were excluded. Pooled 1- and 2-year local control (LC) rates, overall survival (OS), and toxicities were calculated using a random-effects model. Population-weighted linear regression was employed to assess the relationship between dosimetric and clinico-pathologic variables and patient outcomes.
Twelve studies involving 197 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. All patients received two courses of SABR, with a median total dose of 50 Gy in 5 fractions. Pooled 1- and 2-year LC rates were 78.2 % (95 % CI: 66-87 %) and 68.0 % (95 % CI: 55-79 %), respectively. Patients receiving a cumulative biologically effective dose (BED) ≥ 200 Gy had significantly higher LC rates (84.9 %, 95 % CI: 70-93 %) vs (64.9 %, 95 % CI: 54-75 %, p = 0.02). Median OS did not significantly differ between low and high BED groups, though there was a trend toward improved survival with higher BED (21.4 vs 32.6 months). The pooled median OS across all studies was 26.3 months (95 % CI: 25.4-27.1). Improved LC rates were associated with smaller tumours (<2 cm), higher BED from the initial treatment and longer interval (>12 months) between initial and repeat SABR (p < 0.01). Toxicities were minimal, with a pooled incidence of ≥ grade 2 pneumonitis at 6.4 % and only 0.10 % reporting ≥ grade 3 toxicity.
Salvage in-field reirradiation with SABR achieves high local control and low toxicity, particularly in patients receiving higher cumulative BED (≥200 Gy) and with longer intervals (≥12 months) between treatments. These results suggest that repeat SABR is a viable salvage option for selected patients. Further prospective studies are needed to optimise dosing and patient selection for safe and effective reirradiation.
关于两疗程立体定向消融放疗(SABR)用于胸部野内再程放疗的数据较少。本荟萃分析评估重复SABR作为根治性SABR后野内失败的挽救治疗的安全性和有效性。
按照PRISMA指南对PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、MEDLINE和EMBASE数据库进行系统检索。纳入的研究需涉及成年患者,这些患者接受挽救性SABR治疗先前SABR后肺癌的野内复发。为解决局部失败的不同定义问题,若复发发生在原始计划靶区(PTV)内,则纳入该研究。排除野外失败(距PTV>1 cm)的研究或使用非SABR技术的研究。使用随机效应模型计算汇总的1年和2年局部控制(LC)率、总生存期(OS)和毒性。采用总体加权线性回归评估剂量学和临床病理变量与患者预后之间的关系。
定量分析纳入了12项研究,共197例患者。所有患者均接受两疗程SABR,中位总剂量为50 Gy,分5次给予。汇总的1年和2年LC率分别为78.2%(95%CI:66 - 87%)和68.0%(95%CI:55 - 79%)。接受累积生物等效剂量(BED)≥200 Gy的患者的LC率显著高于BED<200 Gy的患者(84.9%,95%CI:70 - 93%)对比(64.9%,95%CI:54 - 75%,p = 0.02)。低BED组和高BED组的中位OS无显著差异,不过随着BED升高有生存改善的趋势(21.4个月对比32.6个月)。所有研究汇总的中位OS为26.3个月(95%CI:25.4 - 27.1)。LC率的提高与较小肿瘤(<2 cm)、初始治疗的较高BED以及初始SABR与重复SABR之间较长间隔(>12个月)相关(p < 0.01)。毒性极小,≥2级肺炎的汇总发生率为6.4%,仅0.10%报告有≥3级毒性。
SABR进行挽救性野内再程放疗可实现高局部控制率和低毒性,尤其在接受较高累积BED(≥200 Gy)且治疗间隔较长(≥12个月)的患者中。这些结果表明,重复SABR对选定患者是一种可行的挽救选择。需要进一步的前瞻性研究来优化剂量和患者选择,以实现安全有效的再程放疗。