International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2010
Differences in clinical results after LINAC-based single-dose radiosurgery versus fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for patients with vestibular schwannomas.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Combs Stephanie E, Welzel Thomas, Schulz-Ertner Daniela, Huber Peter E, Debus Jürgen
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of patients with vestibular schwannoma (VS) treated with fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) vs. those treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS).
METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study is based on an analysis of 200 patients with 202 VSs treated with FSRT (n = 172) or SRS (n = 30). Patients with tumor progression and/or progression of clinical symptoms were selected for treatment. In 165 out of 202 VSs (82%), RT was performed as the primary treatment for VS, and for 37 VSs (18%), RT was conducted for tumor progression after neurosurgical intervention. For patients receiving FSRT, a median total dose of 57.6 Gy was prescribed, with a median fractionation of 5 x 1.8 Gy per week. For patients who underwent SRS, a median single dose of 13 Gy was prescribed to the 80% isodose.
RESULTS: FSRT and SRS were well tolerated. Median follow-up time was 75 months. Local control was not statistically different for both groups. The probability of maintaining the pretreatment hearing level after SRS with doses of < or =13 Gy was comparable to that of FSRT. The radiation dose for the SRS group (< or =13 Gy vs. >13 Gy) significantly influenced hearing preservation rates (p = 0.03). In the group of patients treated with SRS doses of < or =13 Gy, cranial nerve toxicity was comparable to that of the FSRT group.
CONCLUSIONS: FSRT and SRS are both safe and effective alternatives for the treatment of VS. Local control rates are comparable in both groups. SRS with doses of < or =13 Gy is a safe alternative to FSRT. While FSRT can be applied safely for the treatment of VSs of all sizes, SRS should be reserved for smaller lesions.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study is based on an analysis of 200 patients with 202 VSs treated with FSRT (n = 172) or SRS (n = 30). Patients with tumor progression and/or progression of clinical symptoms were selected for treatment. In 165 out of 202 VSs (82%), RT was performed as the primary treatment for VS, and for 37 VSs (18%), RT was conducted for tumor progression after neurosurgical intervention. For patients receiving FSRT, a median total dose of 57.6 Gy was prescribed, with a median fractionation of 5 x 1.8 Gy per week. For patients who underwent SRS, a median single dose of 13 Gy was prescribed to the 80% isodose.
RESULTS: FSRT and SRS were well tolerated. Median follow-up time was 75 months. Local control was not statistically different for both groups. The probability of maintaining the pretreatment hearing level after SRS with doses of < or =13 Gy was comparable to that of FSRT. The radiation dose for the SRS group (< or =13 Gy vs. >13 Gy) significantly influenced hearing preservation rates (p = 0.03). In the group of patients treated with SRS doses of < or =13 Gy, cranial nerve toxicity was comparable to that of the FSRT group.
CONCLUSIONS: FSRT and SRS are both safe and effective alternatives for the treatment of VS. Local control rates are comparable in both groups. SRS with doses of < or =13 Gy is a safe alternative to FSRT. While FSRT can be applied safely for the treatment of VSs of all sizes, SRS should be reserved for smaller lesions.