Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Br J Radiol ; 92(1097): 20180960, 2019 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30864828

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) has better normal-tissue sparing compared with 3-dimensional conformal radiation (3DCRT). We sought to assess the impact of radiation technique on pathological and clinical outcomes in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LANSCLC) treated with a trimodality strategy. METHODS: Retrospective review of LANSCLC patients treated from August 2012 to August 2018 at Sheba Medical Center, Israel. The trimodality strategy consisted of concomitant chemoradiation to 60 Gray (Gy) followed by completion surgery. The planning target volume (PTV) was defined by co-registered PET/CT. Here we compare the pathological regression, surgical margin status, local control rates (LC), disease free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) between 3DCRT and IMRT. RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 74 patients with mean age 62.9 years, male in 51/74 (69%), adenocarcinoma in 46/74 (62.1%), stage 3 in 59/74 (79.7%) and chemotherapy in 72/74 (97.3%). Radiation mean dose: 59.2 Gy (SD ± 3.8). Radiation technique : 3DCRT in 51/74 (68.9%), IMRT in 23/74 (31%). Other variables were similar between groups.Major pathological response (including pathological complete response or less than 10% residual tumor cells) was similar: 32/51 (62.7%) in 3DCRT and 15/23 (65.2%) in IMRT, p=0.83. Pathological complete response (pCR) rates were similar: 17/51 (33.3%) in 3DCRT and 8/23 (34.8%) in IMRT, p=0.9. Surgical margins were negative in 46/51 (90.1%) in 3DCRT vs. 17/19 (89.4%) in IMRT (p=1.0).The 2-year LC rates were 81.6% (95% CI 69-89.4%); DFS 58.3% (95% CI 45.5-69%) and 3-year OS 70% (95% CI57-80%). Comparing radiation techniques, there were no significant differences in LC (p=0.94), DFS (p=0.33) and OS (p=0.72). CONCLUSION: When used to treat LANSCLC in the neoadjuvant setting, both IMRT and 3DCRT produce comparable pathological and clinical outcomes. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study validates the real-world effectiveness of IMRT compared to 3DCRT.


Assuntos
Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/radioterapia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/radioterapia , Radioterapia Conformacional , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada , Idoso , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/patologia , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/cirurgia , Quimiorradioterapia , Pesquisa Comparativa da Efetividade , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Feminino , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patologia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/cirurgia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Terapia Neoadjuvante , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Dosagem Radioterapêutica , Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador , Radioterapia Adjuvante , Radioterapia Conformacional/efeitos adversos , Radioterapia Conformacional/métodos , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada/efeitos adversos , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada/métodos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Análise de Sobrevida , Carga Tumoral
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA