A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Outcomes After Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy or Radiofrequency Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. | LitMetric

Outcomes After Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy or Radiofrequency Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

J Clin Oncol

Daniel R. Wahl, Matthew H. Stenmark, Yebin Tao, Erqi L. Pollom, Elaine M. Caoili, Theodore S. Lawrence, Matthew J. Schipper, and Mary Feng, University of Michigan Medical Center; and Matthew H. Stenmark, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI.

Published: February 2016

Purpose: Data guiding selection of nonsurgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are lacking. We therefore compared outcomes between stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for HCC.

Patients And Methods: From 2004 to 2012, 224 patients with inoperable, nonmetastatic HCC underwent RFA (n = 161) to 249 tumors or image-guided SBRT (n = 63) to 83 tumors. We applied inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for imbalances in treatment assignment. Freedom from local progression (FFLP) and toxicity were retrospectively analyzed.

Results: RFA and SBRT groups were similar with respect to number of lesions treated per patient, type of underlying liver disease, and tumor size (median, 1.8 v 2.2 cm in maximum diameter; P = .14). However, the SBRT group had lower pretreatment Child-Pugh scores (P = .003), higher pretreatment alpha-fetoprotein levels (P = .04), and a greater number of prior liver-directed treatments (P < .001). One- and 2-year FFLP for tumors treated with RFA were 83.6% and 80.2% v 97.4% and 83.8% for SBRT. Increasing tumor size predicted for FFLP in patients treated with RFA (hazard ratio [HR], 1.54 per cm; P = .006), but not with SBRT (HR, 1.21 per cm; P = .617). For tumors ≥ 2 cm, there was decreased FFLP for RFA compared with SBRT (HR, 3.35; P = .025). Acute grade 3+ complications occurred after 11% and 5% of RFA and SBRT treatments, respectively (P = .31). Overall survival 1 and 2 years after treatment was 70% and 53% after RFA and 74% and 46% after SBRT.

Conclusion: Both RFA and SBRT are effective local treatment options for inoperable HCC. Although these data are retrospective, SBRT appears to be a reasonable first-line treatment of inoperable, larger HCC.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4872011PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.61.4925DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

rfa sbrt
12
sbrt
10
rfa
9
outcomes stereotactic
8
stereotactic body
8
body radiotherapy
8
radiofrequency ablation
8
hepatocellular carcinoma
8
tumor size
8
treated rfa
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!