The etiology and disease patterns of hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC)significantly vary among regions. Modern standard treatments commonly require multidisciplinary approaches, including applications of up-to date medici...The etiology and disease patterns of hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC)significantly vary among regions. Modern standard treatments commonly require multidisciplinary approaches, including applications of up-to date medicine and advanced procedures, and necessitate the support of socioeconomic systems. For these reasons, a number of clinical guidelines for HCC from different associations and regions have been presented. External beam radiation therapy was contraindicated for HCC until a few decades ago, but with the development of new technologies, its application has rapidly increased as selective irradiation for tumorous lesions became possible. Most of the guidelines had been opposed or indifferent to radiotherapy in the past, but several guidelines have introduced indications and recommendations for radiotherapy in their updated versions. This review will discuss the characteristics of important guidelines and their contents regarding radiotherapy and will also provide guidance to physicians who are considering applications of locoregional modalities that include radiotherapy.展开更多
基金Supported by the National Research Fund of Korea,No.NRF-2018R1D1A1B07046998
文摘The etiology and disease patterns of hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC)significantly vary among regions. Modern standard treatments commonly require multidisciplinary approaches, including applications of up-to date medicine and advanced procedures, and necessitate the support of socioeconomic systems. For these reasons, a number of clinical guidelines for HCC from different associations and regions have been presented. External beam radiation therapy was contraindicated for HCC until a few decades ago, but with the development of new technologies, its application has rapidly increased as selective irradiation for tumorous lesions became possible. Most of the guidelines had been opposed or indifferent to radiotherapy in the past, but several guidelines have introduced indications and recommendations for radiotherapy in their updated versions. This review will discuss the characteristics of important guidelines and their contents regarding radiotherapy and will also provide guidance to physicians who are considering applications of locoregional modalities that include radiotherapy.
文摘目的 :采用循证医学的方法评价体部立体定向放疗联合化疗治疗晚期胰腺癌的临床效果。方法:通过检索中国知网、万方、维普、Pub Med、Embase数据库,收集有关体部立体定向放疗联合化疗治疗晚期胰腺癌相临床研究,检索时限均从建库至2021年6月。依据事先设置的文献纳入与排除标准,筛选出符合要求的临床研究,应用Rev Man 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果:共纳入21项临床研究,总计1738例患者。Meta分析结果显示,对于晚期胰腺癌患者,使用立体定向放疗联合化疗与单独化疗比较,有较好的客观有效率(Z=9.59,P<0.001,OR=4.71,95%CI:3.43~6.46)、1年生存率(Z=5.00,P<0.001,OR=2.36,95%CI:1.69~3.31)、2年生存率(Z=3.61,P<0.001,OR=2.76,95%CI:1.59~4.79),骨髓抑制发生率(Z=0.07,P=0.95,OR=0.98,95%CI:0.51~1.87)和消化道反应发生率(Z=0.01,P=0.99,OR=1.0,95%CI:0.58~1.72)差异无统计学意义;使用立体定向放疗联合化疗与单独体部立体定向放疗比较,有较高的客观有效率(Z=4.97,P<0.001,OR=2.68,95%CI:1.82~3.95)、2年生存率(Z=4.40,P<0.001,OR=3.86,95%CI:2.11~7.04)和骨髓抑制发生率(Z=2.49,P=0.01,OR=4.51,95%CI:1.38~14.72),1年生存率Z=0.84,P=0.40,OR=1.46,95%CI:0.60~3.54)和消化道反应发生率(Z=0.84,P=0.40,OR=1.68,95%CI:0.50~5.57)差异无统计学意义。结论:立体定向放疗联合化疗治疗晚期胰腺癌有较好的临床效果,这些结果还需要未来在大样本、高质量的随机对照试验中进行评估。
文摘背景与目的越来越多的胸科医生选择电视辅助胸腔镜手术(video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery,VATS)来治疗早期非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)。目前,仍然没有随机试验来比较VATS和体部立体定向放疗(stereotactic body radiotherapy,SBRT)的临床疗效。为此,在本meta分析中,我们比较了电视辅助胸腔镜手术和体部立体定向放疗在治疗早期NSCLC患者过程中的疗效,以期为今后对此两种疗法的选择提供参考。方法系统地检索5个主要的医学期刊数据库:中国知网、维普网、PubMed、Embase和ISI web of science,收集时间涵盖2010年1月-2016年2月的应用电视辅助胸腔镜手术和体部立体定向放疗治疗早期NSCLC的所有文献。最后,纳入了拥有足够患者数量和放疗剂量的原创中英文研究成果。在校正了中位年龄和可手术患者人数之后,应用多变量随机效应模型比较了电视辅助胸腔镜手术和体部立体定向放疗治疗后早期NSCLC患者的总生存率和无疾病生存率。结果纳入相同时期的14个电视辅助胸腔镜手术研究成果(包含3,482个患者)和19个体部立体定向放疗研究成果(包含3,997个患者)。VATS组中位年龄和随访时间分别为64岁和43.4个月,SBRT组中位年龄和随访时间分别为74岁和29.5个月。VATS组校正前1年、2年、3年、5年平均总生存率分别为93.5%、84.9%、77.0%、76.3%。SBRT组校正前1年、2年、3年、5年平均总生存率分别为89.0%、73.3%、59.0%、36.7%。VATS组校正前1年、2年、3年、5年平均无病生存率分别为93.6%、88.6%、85.6%、75.6%。SBRT组校正前1年、2年、3年、5年平均无病生存率分别为79.3%、72.1%、64.9%、58.9%。然而,以中位年龄和可手术程度进行校正之后,预期VATS组1年、2年、3年、5年总生存率为94%、92%、84%、71%,预期SBRT组1年、2年、3年、5年总生存率为98%、95%、87%、83%。预期VATS组1年、2年、3年、5年无病生存率为97%、94%、85%、75%,预期SBRT组1年、2年、3年、5年无病生存率为88%、81%、74%、63%。结论在校正前,施以体部立体定向放疗的患者临床表现(总生存率和无病生存率)并不如施以电视辅助胸腔镜手术的患者。但考虑到年龄与可手术程度,施以体部立体定向放疗的患者年龄偏大,可手术程度偏低。以年龄和可手术程度进行校正后,我们发现两种疗法治疗早期NSCLC的总生存率和无病生存率并没有显著区别。
文摘脊柱转移是乳腺癌最常见的远处转移部位。乳腺癌伴发的脊柱转移多以溶骨性改变为主,常导致骨相关事件(skeletal-related events,SRE)的发生,严重影响患者的生存质量。其中有一亚群的患者,肿瘤的转移潜能及总负荷有限,即处于所谓的“寡转移”状态。对于脊柱“寡转移”患者,放疗的作用不仅局限于姑息止痛,还是潜在根治的手段。将就体部立体定向放射治疗(stereotactic body radiation therapy,SBRT)在乳腺癌脊柱转移中的应用进行综述。
