Hepatology communications · 2023
Thermal ablation compared to stereotactic body radiation therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A multicenter retrospective comparative study.
Многоцентровое исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Moon Andrew M, Kim Hannah P, Singal Amit G, Owen Dawn, Mendiratta-Lala Mishal, Parikh Neehar D, Rose Steven C, McGinty Katrina A, Agala Chris B, Burke Lauren M, Abate Anjelica, Altun Ersan, Beyer Christian, Do John, Folkert Michael R, Forbes Chalon, Hattangadi-Gluth Jona A, Hayashi Paul H, Jones Keri, Khatri Gaurav, Kono Yuko, Lawrence Theodore S, Maurino Christopher, Mauro David M, Mayo Charles S, Pak Taemee, Patil Preethi, Sanders Emily C, Simpson Daniel R, Tepper Joel E, Thapa Diwash, Yanagihara Ted K, Wang Kyle, Gerber David A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AIMS: Early-stage HCC can be treated with thermal ablation or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). We retrospectively compared local progression, mortality, and toxicity among patients with HCC treated with ablation or SBRT in a multicenter, US cohort.
APPROACH RESULTS: We included adult patients with treatment-naïve HCC lesions without vascular invasion treated with thermal ablation or SBRT per individual physician or institutional preference from January 2012 to December 2018. Outcomes included local progression after a 3-month landmark period assessed at the lesion level and overall survival at the patient level. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to account for imbalances in treatment groups. The Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to compare progression and overall survival, and logistic regression was used for toxicity. There were 642 patients with 786 lesions (median size: 2.1 cm) treated with ablation or SBRT. In adjusted analyses, SBRT was associated with a reduced risk of local progression compared to ablation (aHR 0.30, 95% CI: 0.15-0.60). However, SBRT-treated patients had an increased risk of liver dysfunction at 3 months (absolute difference 5.5%, aOR 2.31, 95% CI: 1.13-4.73) and death (aHR 2.04, 95% CI: 1.44-2.88, p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter study of patients with HCC, SBRT was associated with a lower risk of local progression compared to thermal ablation but higher all-cause mortality. Survival differences may be attributable to residual confounding, patient selection, or downstream treatments. These retrospective real-world data help guide treatment decisions while demonstrating the need for a prospective clinical trial.
APPROACH RESULTS: We included adult patients with treatment-naïve HCC lesions without vascular invasion treated with thermal ablation or SBRT per individual physician or institutional preference from January 2012 to December 2018. Outcomes included local progression after a 3-month landmark period assessed at the lesion level and overall survival at the patient level. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to account for imbalances in treatment groups. The Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to compare progression and overall survival, and logistic regression was used for toxicity. There were 642 patients with 786 lesions (median size: 2.1 cm) treated with ablation or SBRT. In adjusted analyses, SBRT was associated with a reduced risk of local progression compared to ablation (aHR 0.30, 95% CI: 0.15-0.60). However, SBRT-treated patients had an increased risk of liver dysfunction at 3 months (absolute difference 5.5%, aOR 2.31, 95% CI: 1.13-4.73) and death (aHR 2.04, 95% CI: 1.44-2.88, p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter study of patients with HCC, SBRT was associated with a lower risk of local progression compared to thermal ablation but higher all-cause mortality. Survival differences may be attributable to residual confounding, patient selection, or downstream treatments. These retrospective real-world data help guide treatment decisions while demonstrating the need for a prospective clinical trial.