Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Effect of intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus two-dimensional conventional radiotherapy alone in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
OuYang, Pu-Yun; Shi, Dingbo; Sun, Rui; Zhu, Yu-Jia; Xiao, Yao; Zhang, Lu-Ning; Zhang, Xu-Hui; Chen, Ze-Ying; Lan, Xiao-Wen; Tang, Jie; Gao, Yuan-Hong; Ma, Jun; Deng, Wuguo; Xie, Fang-Yun.
Afiliação
  • OuYang PY; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Shi D; Department of Experimental Research, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Sun R; Department of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Zhu YJ; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Xiao Y; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Zhang LN; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Zhang XH; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Chen ZY; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Lan XW; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Tang J; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Gao YH; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Ma J; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Deng W; Department of Experimental Research, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
  • Xie FY; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Oncotarget ; 7(22): 33408-17, 2016 May 31.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27058901
BACKGROUND: Albeit intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is currently the recommended radiation technique in treating nasopharyngeal carcinoma, the effect of IMRT versus two-dimensional conventional radiotherapy (2DCRT) alone is still contradictory. RESULTS: In the original unmatched cohort of 1198 patients, IMRT obtained comparable 5-year overall survival (OS) (91.3% vs 87.1%, P = 0.120), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRFS) (92.3% vs 90.4%, P = 0.221) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (92.9% vs 92.1%, P = 0.901) to 2DCRT. In the propensity-matched cohort of 604 patients, no significant survival differences were observed between the two arms (5-year OS 90.9% vs 90.5%, P = 0.655; LRFS 92.5% vs 92.4%, P = 0.866; DMFS 92.5% vs 92.9%, P = 0.384). In multivariate analysis, IMRT did not significantly lower the risk of death, locoregional relapse or distant metastasis, irrespective of tumor stage. METHODS: Overall, 1198 patients who underwent IMRT (316 patients) or 2DCRT (882 patients) without any chemotherapy was retrospectively analyzed. Patients in both arms were matched at equal ratio using propensity-score matching method. OS, LRFS and DMFS were assessed with Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test and Cox regression. CONCLUSIONS: In this propensity-matched study, IMRT showed no survival advantage over 2DCRT alone in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Carcinoma / Neoplasias Faríngeas / Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Oncotarget Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: China

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Carcinoma / Neoplasias Faríngeas / Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Oncotarget Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: China