Limits...
Comparative research on the efficacy of CyberKnife® and surgical excision for Stage I hepatocellular carcinoma.

Yuan Z, Tian L, Wang P, Song Y, Dong Y, Zhuang H - Onco Targets Ther (2013)

Bottom Line: The survival curves were drawn using the Kaplan-Meier method along with log-rank test analysis.The results showed that the adverse effects of CyberKnife were milder, with 1-, 2-, and 3-year local control rates of 92.9%, 90.0%, and 67.7%, respectively.The overall survival rates of the surgical treatment were 88.5%, 73.1%, and 69.2% for the same periods, while those of CyberKnife treatment were 72.7%, 66.7%, and 57.1%, respectively.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Radiotherapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, People's Republic of China.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To retrospectively analyze and compare the outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with either surgical excision or CyberKnife® from September 2006 to August 2011.

Materials and methods: Local control and toxicity were the primary endpoints, followed by local progression-free survival, progression-free survival, and overall survival as the secondary endpoints. Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors were the evaluation criteria for efficacy; Common Toxicity Criteria 3.0 were the evaluation criteria for adverse events. Local control was calculated using the direct method (nonactuarial). The survival curves were drawn using the Kaplan-Meier method along with log-rank test analysis.

Results: The research included 26 patients treated with tumor-free cutting edge (R0) surgical excision and 22 patients treated with CyberKnife treatment. The results showed that the adverse effects of CyberKnife were milder, with 1-, 2-, and 3-year local control rates of 92.9%, 90.0%, and 67.7%, respectively. The overall survival rates of the surgical treatment were 88.5%, 73.1%, and 69.2% for the same periods, while those of CyberKnife treatment were 72.7%, 66.7%, and 57.1%, respectively. In this study, surgical excision appeared to prolong overall survival to a greater extent, but with no statistical significance; no statistical difference was observed in the tumor-specific overall survival and progression-free survival between the two cohorts.

Conclusion: According to this preliminary study, with its mild toxicity, the efficacy of CyberKnife treatment for early hepatocellular carcinoma was on par with that of surgical resection.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

The comparison of PFS and OS between Cyberknife® and surgery.Note: CyberKnife® (Accuray Incorporated, Sunnyvale, CA, USA).Abbreviations: PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3814930&req=5

f1-ott-6-1527: The comparison of PFS and OS between Cyberknife® and surgery.Note: CyberKnife® (Accuray Incorporated, Sunnyvale, CA, USA).Abbreviations: PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival.

Mentions: At follow-up (median: 53.4 months; range: 7.5–79.3 months), the 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates of the surgery arm were 88.5%, 73.1%, and 69.2%, respectively, while those of the CyberKnife group were 72.7%, 66.7%, and 57.1%, respectively (median follow-up time: 23.5 months; range: 2.5–69.2 months). According to log-rank analysis, the survival curves of the two cohorts showed that there was no statistical difference between the PFS of the patients in the two groups. Although no statistical difference was observed in the OS of the two study groups, the surgery group fared a little better than the CyberKnife-treated group (Figure 1). Because of the myriad of heterogeneities between the two study arms, we carried out a cause-of-death analysis in the two groups (Table 3), which showed that more patients died from nondisease-related causes in the CyberKnife treatment group than in the surgery group. When these patients were excluded, no statistical differences were observed in PFS and OS on the tumor-specific survival analysis (Figure 2).


Comparative research on the efficacy of CyberKnife® and surgical excision for Stage I hepatocellular carcinoma.

Yuan Z, Tian L, Wang P, Song Y, Dong Y, Zhuang H - Onco Targets Ther (2013)

The comparison of PFS and OS between Cyberknife® and surgery.Note: CyberKnife® (Accuray Incorporated, Sunnyvale, CA, USA).Abbreviations: PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3814930&req=5

f1-ott-6-1527: The comparison of PFS and OS between Cyberknife® and surgery.Note: CyberKnife® (Accuray Incorporated, Sunnyvale, CA, USA).Abbreviations: PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival.
Mentions: At follow-up (median: 53.4 months; range: 7.5–79.3 months), the 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates of the surgery arm were 88.5%, 73.1%, and 69.2%, respectively, while those of the CyberKnife group were 72.7%, 66.7%, and 57.1%, respectively (median follow-up time: 23.5 months; range: 2.5–69.2 months). According to log-rank analysis, the survival curves of the two cohorts showed that there was no statistical difference between the PFS of the patients in the two groups. Although no statistical difference was observed in the OS of the two study groups, the surgery group fared a little better than the CyberKnife-treated group (Figure 1). Because of the myriad of heterogeneities between the two study arms, we carried out a cause-of-death analysis in the two groups (Table 3), which showed that more patients died from nondisease-related causes in the CyberKnife treatment group than in the surgery group. When these patients were excluded, no statistical differences were observed in PFS and OS on the tumor-specific survival analysis (Figure 2).

Bottom Line: The survival curves were drawn using the Kaplan-Meier method along with log-rank test analysis.The results showed that the adverse effects of CyberKnife were milder, with 1-, 2-, and 3-year local control rates of 92.9%, 90.0%, and 67.7%, respectively.The overall survival rates of the surgical treatment were 88.5%, 73.1%, and 69.2% for the same periods, while those of CyberKnife treatment were 72.7%, 66.7%, and 57.1%, respectively.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Radiotherapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, People's Republic of China.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To retrospectively analyze and compare the outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with either surgical excision or CyberKnife® from September 2006 to August 2011.

Materials and methods: Local control and toxicity were the primary endpoints, followed by local progression-free survival, progression-free survival, and overall survival as the secondary endpoints. Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors were the evaluation criteria for efficacy; Common Toxicity Criteria 3.0 were the evaluation criteria for adverse events. Local control was calculated using the direct method (nonactuarial). The survival curves were drawn using the Kaplan-Meier method along with log-rank test analysis.

Results: The research included 26 patients treated with tumor-free cutting edge (R0) surgical excision and 22 patients treated with CyberKnife treatment. The results showed that the adverse effects of CyberKnife were milder, with 1-, 2-, and 3-year local control rates of 92.9%, 90.0%, and 67.7%, respectively. The overall survival rates of the surgical treatment were 88.5%, 73.1%, and 69.2% for the same periods, while those of CyberKnife treatment were 72.7%, 66.7%, and 57.1%, respectively. In this study, surgical excision appeared to prolong overall survival to a greater extent, but with no statistical significance; no statistical difference was observed in the tumor-specific overall survival and progression-free survival between the two cohorts.

Conclusion: According to this preliminary study, with its mild toxicity, the efficacy of CyberKnife treatment for early hepatocellular carcinoma was on par with that of surgical resection.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus