4.5 Article

Dose-Response Relationship between Radiation Dose and Loco-regional Control in Patients with Stage II-III Esophageal Cancer Treated with Definitive Chemoradiotherapy

期刊

CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT
卷 49, 期 3, 页码 669-677

出版社

KOREAN CANCER ASSOCIATION
DOI: 10.4143/crt.2016.354

关键词

Esophageal neoplasms; Chemoradiotherapy; Radiation dose-response relationship

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose The correlation between radiation dose and loco-regional control (LRC) was evaluated in patients with stage II-III esophageal cancer treated with definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Materials and Methods Medical records of 236 stage II-III esophageal cancer patients treated with definitive CRT at Yonsei Cancer Center between 1994 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Among these, 120 received a radiation dose of < 60 Gy (standard-dose group), while 116 received 60 Gy (high-dose group). The median doses of radiation in the standard- and high-dose groups were 50.4 and 63 Gy, respectively. Concurrent 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin chemotherapy was administered to most patients. Results There were no differences in patient characteristics between the two groups except for high Karnofsky performance status and lower-thoracic lesions being more prevalent in the standard-dose group. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times were 13.2 months and 26.2 months, respectively. Patients in the high-dose group had significantly better 2-year LRC (69.1% vs. 50.3%, p=0.002), median PFS (16.7 months vs. 11.7 months, p=0.029), and median OS (35.1 months vs. 22.3 months, p=0.043). Additionally, LRC exhibited a dose-response relationship and the complete response rate was significantly higher in the high-dose group (p=0.006). There were no significant differences in treatment-related toxicities between the groups. Conclusion A higher radiation dose (> 60 Gy) is associated with increased LRC, PFS, and OS in patients with stage II-III esophageal cancer treated with definitive CRT.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据