高级检索
当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

Comparison of efficacy, safety, and costs between neoadjuvant hypofractionated radiotherapy and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for esophageal carcinoma

文献详情

资源类型:
WOS体系:
Pubmed体系:

收录情况: ◇ SCIE

机构: [1]Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Institute, Chengdu, China [2]School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China [3]Ya'an people's hospital, Ya'an, China
出处:
ISSN:

关键词: conventionally fractionated radiotherapy costs esophageal cancer hypofractionated radiotherapy neoadjuvant prognosis

摘要:
Background We compared the efficacy, safety, and costs of hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) and conventional fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) for the neoadjuvant treatment of esophageal cancer. Materials and Methods Overall, 110 patients with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy from October 2002 to July 2017 were retrospectively included and divided into a HFRT group (42 patients received 30 Gray [Gy]/10 fractions for 2 weeks) and a CFRT group [68 patients received 40 Gy/20 fractions for 4 weeks]. Concurrent chemotherapy comprised cisplatin combined with either 5-FU or taxane. Surgery was performed 3-8 weeks after radiotherapy. We compared the outcomes, adverse events, and costs between the two groups. Results Pathological downstaging was achieved in 78.6% of the HFRT group and 83.8% of the CFRT group (P = 0.612). Compared with the CFRT group, the HFRT group had similar pathological complete response (pCR) (33.3% vs 35.3%; P = 0.834), median overall survival (OS) (40.8 months vs 44.9 months; P = 0.772) and progression free survival (32.7 months vs 35.4 months; P = 0.785). The perioperative complication rates were also similar between the groups, but the treatment time and costs were significantly reduced in the HFRT group (P < 0.05). Finally, multivariate analysis identified cN0 stage, pathological downstaging and pCR as independent predictors of better OS. Conclusion Preoperative HFRT is effective and safe for esophageal cancer. Moreover, it is similar to CFRT in terms of overall survival and toxicity and is cost effective and less time consuming.

基金:
语种:
被引次数:
WOS:
PubmedID:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2019]版:
大类 | 2 区 医学
小类 | 3 区 肿瘤学
最新[2023]版:
大类 | 2 区 医学
小类 | 3 区 肿瘤学
JCR分区:
出版当年[2019]版:
Q2 ONCOLOGY
最新[2023]版:
Q2 ONCOLOGY

影响因子: 最新[2023版] 最新五年平均 出版当年[2019版] 出版当年五年平均 出版前一年[2018版] 出版后一年[2020版]

第一作者:
第一作者机构: [1]Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Institute, Chengdu, China [2]School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China
共同第一作者:
通讯作者:
通讯机构: [1]Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Institute, Chengdu, China [2]School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China [*1]Department of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer hospital institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China. No. 55, 4th section of Renmin South Road, Chengdu, China.
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:43389 今日访问量:0 总访问量:3120 更新日期:2024-09-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 四川省肿瘤医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:成都市人民南路四段55号