Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Li, L.-Q.
• Su, T.-S.
• Wu, Q.-Y.
• Lin, Z.-T.
• Liang, S.-X.

Titel

Therapeutic Outcome of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Small Hepatocellular Carcinoma Lesions – A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Ist Teil von

• Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)), 2023-10, Vol.35 (10), p.652-664

Ort / Verlag

England: Elsevier Ltd

Erscheinungsjahr

2023

Quelle

Alma/SFX Local Collection

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Surgical resection, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have seldom been compared for small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We explored the treatment outcomes of SBRT for small HCC by conducting a network meta-analysis (NMA). We compared the efficacy and safety of surgical resection, RFA and SBRT for liver-confined small HCC (three or fewer lesions with a diameter ≤5 cm). The study endpoint included the odds ratios of the 1-, 3- and 5-year progression/recurrence/disease-free survival (disease progression-free survival; DPFS) and overall survival rates, as well as severe complications. Forty-five studies included 21 468 patients. In the NMA with comparable data, SBRT had comparable 1-, 3- and 5-year DPFS but significantly worse pooled long-term overall survival (3- and 5-year overall survival) than surgical resection (odds ratio 1.39, 95% confidential interval 1.3–1.89; odds ratio 1.33, 95% confidence interval 1.06–1.69, respectively). SBRT was associated with significantly better pooled 1-year DPFS compared with RFA (odds ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.15–0.97), with the remaining outcomes being comparable. SBRT had significantly less incidence of severe complications compared with surgical resection (odds ratio 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.42–0.88) and RFA (odds ratio 0.2, 95% confidence interval 0.03–0.94). In conclusion, for small HCCs (≤5 cm) with one to three nodules, SBRT may be favourable to reduce the risks of severe complications. In terms of DPFS, SBRT may be recommended as an alternative first-line therapy for RFA and surgical resection. The results regarding overall survival should be interpreted with caution, considering the potentially uneliminated bias. There is a clear need for well-designed randomised trials to conclusively identify real differences in efficacy between these treatments, especially SBRT and surgical resection.