Dataset Information

Dose-escalated radiation therapy is associated with better overall survival in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors: a propensity score-matched study.

ABSTRACT: We aimed to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients with bone metastases (BM) from solid tumors after standard-dose radiotherapy ([RT]; 30 Gy administered in 10 fractions; EQD2Gy = 32.5 Gy) and dose-escalated RT (EQD2Gy > 32.5 Gy). We retrospectively reviewed the clinical charts of 1795 patients (median age, 62.3 years; age range, 18-96 years) with BM from solid tumors who were referred for RT to our institute between 2000 and 2013. These patients were assigned to the standard-dose (n = 1125; 63%) and dose-escalated (n = 670; 37%) RT groups. OS, estimated as the duration between the first RT session and death, served as the main outcome measure. The dose-escalated RT group had a significantly better OS than the standard-dose RT group (P = 0.000). After allowing potential confounders in multivariate analysis, the RT dose retained its independent association with OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.837; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.753-0.929, P = 0.001). After propensity score matching of the baseline characteristics of both groups, RT dose retained its independent association with OS (HR, 0.887; 95% CI, 0.737-0.951; P = 0.011) on multivariate analysis. Dose-escalated RT exerted more favorable effects on OS in patients with non-lung cancer, those without multiple metastases, those without symptoms, and those with favorable prognosis. Dose-escalated RT was significantly associated with better OS in patients with BM from solid malignancies, particularly among those with non-lung cancer, those without multiple metastases, those without symptoms, and those with favorable prognosis.

SUBMITTER: Chou YC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5603838 | biostudies-other | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Dose-escalated radiation therapy is associated with better overall survival in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors: a propensity score-matched study.

Chou Yung-Chih YC Lin Chien-Yu CY Pai Ping-Ching PC Tseng Chen-Kan CK Hsieh Cheng-En CE Chang Kai-Ping KP Hsu Cheng-Lung CL Liao Chun-Ta CT Wang Chun-Chieh CC Chin Shy-Chyi SC Yen Tzu-Chen TC Ho Tsung-Ying TY Hong Ji-Hong JH Lei Kin-Fong KF Chang Joseph Tung-Chieh JT Tsang Ngan-Ming NM

Cancer medicine 20170815 9

We aimed to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients with bone metastases (BM) from solid tumors after standard-dose radiotherapy ([RT]; 30 Gy administered in 10 fractions; EQD<sub>2Gy</sub> = 32.5 Gy) and dose-escalated RT (EQD<sub>2Gy</sub> > 32.5 Gy). We retrospectively reviewed the clinical charts of 1795 patients (median age, 62.3 years; age range, 18-96 years) with BM from solid tumors who were referred for RT to our institute between 2000 and 2013. These patients were assigned to t ...[more]

PMID: 28809463

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background The optimal treatment for pulmonary metastases has not been determined, and the survival benefit of surgical resection in selected patients remains controversial. The purpose of this retrospective study was to explore whether surgery can prolong survival in patients with pulmonary metastases compared with chemotherapy, and to analyze the factors that may affect the long-term survival of patients with pulmonary metastases. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients with pulmonary metastases from June 2012 to June 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance factors that might affect survival between the two groups. The data were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models to compare the survival of the surgery group and the chemotherapy group. Results A total of 202 patients with pulmonary metastases were enrolled in the study, with 43 patients in the surgery group and 43 in the chemotherapy group after screening and PSM. After PSM, patients in the surgery group had better survival than those in the chemotherapy group, with 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of 75.1% and 48.0%, respectively (P=0.017). Univariate analysis of the two groups of patients found that the treatment method, the number of metastases, and the total diameter of metastases were prognostic factors, but multivariate analysis did not find independent prognostic factors. In the surgical group, univariate analysis found that disease-free interval (DFI), the number of metastases, surgical methods, resection scope and surgical route were prognostic factors, and multivariate analysis showed that only DFI was an independent prognostic factor. In the chemotherapy group, DFI and the response of metastases to chemotherapy were found to be prognostic factors in univariate analysis, but no independent prognostic factors were found in multivariate analysis. Conclusions Surgery does not provide a significant survival advantage. For patients undergoing surgery, longer DFI predicts better survival.

Project description:Background: It remains unclear whether the short-term benefits of laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) accrue to patients with recurrent liver tumors. The present study aimed to report our own center's experience and perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LRH in comparison with open repeat hepatectomy (ORH) for treating recurrent liver tumors. Patients and Methods: A propensity score-matched study was performed including 426 patients receiving LRH or ORH for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma between January 2017 and December 2018. Surgical outcomes and perioperative inflammation-based markers, including monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and systemic immune-inflammation index were collected from medical records and analyzed. Additionally, a systematic literature review was performed to identify relevant studies in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases up to October 1, 2020. Information including patient demographics, pathologic characteristics, and short-term outcomes was extracted and analyzed using random- or fixed-effects models. Results: Of 68 LRHs, 57 were matched with an ORH finally. Our study demonstrated that LRH was significantly associated with less intraoperative blood loss (50 vs. 100 mL; P < 0.001), lower rate of hepatic inflow occlusion (10.52 vs. 33.3%; P = 0.003), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (5 vs. 6 days; P = 0.001) after 1:1 propensity score matching. The operation time, rate of blood transfusion, and postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. Moreover, all four inflammation-based markers were significantly lower in LRH group on postoperative day 1. In the meta-analysis, a total of 12 studies comprising 1,315 patients receiving repeat hepatectomy met the selection criteria. Similar to our own study, the meta-analysis showed shorter hospital stay [standard mean difference (SMD) = -0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.79 to -0.22, P < 0.001], less intraoperative blood loss (SMD = -0.79, 95% CI = -1.11 to -0.47, P < 0.001), and lower rate of major postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR) = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.19-0.66, P = 0.001] in the LRH group. There was no difference in the field of overall postoperative complication and operation time between LRH and ORH groups. Conclusion: Compared with ORH, LRH results in relatively better surgical outcomes and faster postoperative recovery. It could be considered a feasible and effective option for the treatment of recurrent liver tumors.

Dataset Information

Dose-escalated radiation therapy is associated with better overall survival in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors: a propensity score-matched study.

Publications

Dose-escalated radiation therapy is associated with better overall survival in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors: a propensity score-matched study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets