Po-Ming Wang1, Na-Na Chung1, Wei-Chung Hsu2, Feng-Ling Chang1, Chin-Jyh Jang1, Marta Scorsetti3. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Chung-Kang Branch, Cheng-Ching General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Chung-Kang Branch, Cheng-Ching General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan ; Department of Healthcare Administration, Asia University, Taichung, Taiwan. 3. Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Rozzano, Milano, Italy.
Abstract
AIM: To discuss current dosage for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients and suggest alternative treatment strategies according to liver segmentation as defined by the Couinaud classification. BACKGROUND: SBRT is a safe and effective alternative treatment for HCC patients who are unable to undergo liver ablation/resection. However, the SBRT fractionation schemes and treatment planning strategies are not well established. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this article, the latest developments and key findings from research studies exploring the efficacy of SBRT fractionation schemes for treatment of HCC are reviewed. Patients' characteristics, fractionation schemes, treatment outcomes and toxicities were compiled. Special attention was focused on SBRT fractionation approaches that take into consideration liver segmentation according to the Couinaud classification and functional hepatic reserve based on Child-Pugh (CP) liver cirrhosis classification. RESULTS: The most common SBRT fractionation schemes for HCC were 3 × 10-20 Gy, 4-6 × 8-10 Gy, and 10 × 5-5.5 Gy. Based on previous SBRT studies, and in consideration of tumor size and CP classification, we proposed 3 × 15-25 Gy for patients with tumor size <3 cm and adequate liver reserve (CP-A score 5), 5 × 10-12 Gy for patients with tumor sizes between 3 and 5 cm or inadequate liver reserve (CP-A score 6), and 10 × 5-5.5 Gy for patients with tumor size >5 cm or CP-B score. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment schemes in SBRT for HCC vary according to liver segmentation and functional hepatic reserve. Further prospective studies may be necessary to identify the optimal dose of SBRT for HCC.
AIM: To discuss current dosage for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients and suggest alternative treatment strategies according to liver segmentation as defined by the Couinaud classification. BACKGROUND: SBRT is a safe and effective alternative treatment for HCC patients who are unable to undergo liver ablation/resection. However, the SBRT fractionation schemes and treatment planning strategies are not well established. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this article, the latest developments and key findings from research studies exploring the efficacy of SBRT fractionation schemes for treatment of HCC are reviewed. Patients' characteristics, fractionation schemes, treatment outcomes and toxicities were compiled. Special attention was focused on SBRT fractionation approaches that take into consideration liver segmentation according to the Couinaud classification and functional hepatic reserve based on Child-Pugh (CP) liver cirrhosis classification. RESULTS: The most common SBRT fractionation schemes for HCC were 3 × 10-20 Gy, 4-6 × 8-10 Gy, and 10 × 5-5.5 Gy. Based on previous SBRT studies, and in consideration of tumor size and CP classification, we proposed 3 × 15-25 Gy for patients with tumor size <3 cm and adequate liver reserve (CP-A score 5), 5 × 10-12 Gy for patients with tumor sizes between 3 and 5 cm or inadequate liver reserve (CP-A score 6), and 10 × 5-5.5 Gy for patients with tumor size >5 cm or CP-B score. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment schemes in SBRT for HCC vary according to liver segmentation and functional hepatic reserve. Further prospective studies may be necessary to identify the optimal dose of SBRT for HCC.
Entities:
Keywords:
Hepatitis B virus; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Segment; Stereotactic body radiation therapy
Authors: L A Dawson; C J McGinn; D Normolle; R K Ten Haken; S Walker; W Ensminger; T S Lawrence Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Paul Revel-Mouroz; Philippe Otal; Marion Jaffro; Antoine Petermann; Olivier Meyrignac; Pierre Rabinel; Fatima-Zohra Mokrane Journal: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother Date: 2017-04-14
Authors: Berardino De Bari; Thomas Breuneval; Michele Zeverino; Sarah Godin; Letizia Deantonio; Christine Geldhof; Jean Bourhis; Nicklaus Schaefer; Raphaël Moeckli; John Prior; Mahmut Ozsahin Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-10-10 Impact factor: 3.240