Jim Zhong1,2, Kirtesh Patel1,2, Jeffrey Switchenko2,3, Richard J Cassidy1,2, William A Hall4, Theresa Gillespie2,5, Pretesh R Patel1,2, David Kooby2,5, Jerome Landry1,2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. 2. Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. 3. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 5. Department of Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As systemic therapy has improved for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), efforts to improve local control with optimal radiotherapy may be critical. Although conventionally fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT) has more recently shown a limited role in LAPC, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is an emerging approach with promising results. With no studies to date comparing SBRT with CFRT for LAPC, this study used the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) to evaluate these 2 modalities. METHODS: With the NCDB, patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer cT2-4/N0-1/M0 adenocarcinoma of the pancreas diagnosed from 2004 to 2013 were analyzed. Radiation therapy delivered at ≤2 Gy was deemed CFRT, and radiation therapy delivered at ≥4 Gy per fraction was considered SBRT. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank testing, and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression were performed with overall survival (OS) as the primary outcome. Propensity score matching was used. RESULTS: Among 8450 patients, 7819 (92.5%) were treated with CFRT, and 631 (7.5%) underwent SBRT. Receipt of SBRT was associated with superior OS in the multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.93; P < .001). With propensity score matching, 988 patients in all were matched, with 494 patients in each cohort. Within the propensity-matched cohorts, the median OS (13.9 vs 11.6 months) and the 2-year OS rate (21.7% vs 16.5%) were significantly higher with SBRT versus CFRT (P = .0014). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective review using a large national database, SBRT was associated with superior OS in comparison with CFRT for LAPC, and these findings remained significant in a propensity-matched analysis. Further prospective studies investigating these hypothesis-generating results are warranted. Cancer 2017;123:3486-93.
BACKGROUND: As systemic therapy has improved for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), efforts to improve local control with optimal radiotherapy may be critical. Although conventionally fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT) has more recently shown a limited role in LAPC, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is an emerging approach with promising results. With no studies to date comparing SBRT with CFRT for LAPC, this study used the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) to evaluate these 2 modalities. METHODS: With the NCDB, patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer cT2-4/N0-1/M0 adenocarcinoma of the pancreas diagnosed from 2004 to 2013 were analyzed. Radiation therapy delivered at ≤2 Gy was deemed CFRT, and radiation therapy delivered at ≥4 Gy per fraction was considered SBRT. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank testing, and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression were performed with overall survival (OS) as the primary outcome. Propensity score matching was used. RESULTS: Among 8450 patients, 7819 (92.5%) were treated with CFRT, and 631 (7.5%) underwent SBRT. Receipt of SBRT was associated with superior OS in the multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.93; P < .001). With propensity score matching, 988 patients in all were matched, with 494 patients in each cohort. Within the propensity-matched cohorts, the median OS (13.9 vs 11.6 months) and the 2-year OS rate (21.7% vs 16.5%) were significantly higher with SBRT versus CFRT (P = .0014). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective review using a large national database, SBRT was associated with superior OS in comparison with CFRT for LAPC, and these findings remained significant in a propensity-matched analysis. Further prospective studies investigating these hypothesis-generating results are warranted. Cancer 2017;123:3486-93.
Authors: Kush Goyal; Douglas Einstein; Rafael A Ibarra; Min Yao; Charles Kunos; Rod Ellis; James Brindle; Deepjot Singh; Jeffrey Hardacre; Yuxia Zhang; Jeffrey Fabians; Gary Funkhouser; Mitchell Machtay; Juan R Sanabria Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2011-09-05 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Thierry Conroy; Françoise Desseigne; Marc Ychou; Olivier Bouché; Rosine Guimbaud; Yves Bécouarn; Antoine Adenis; Jean-Luc Raoul; Sophie Gourgou-Bourgade; Christelle de la Fouchardière; Jaafar Bennouna; Jean-Baptiste Bachet; Faiza Khemissa-Akouz; Denis Péré-Vergé; Catherine Delbaldo; Eric Assenat; Bruno Chauffert; Pierre Michel; Christine Montoto-Grillot; Michel Ducreux Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-05-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: H R Menck; M P Cunningham; J M Jessup; H J Eyre; D P Winchester; C E Scott-Conner; G P Murphy Journal: Cancer Date: 1997-12-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Michael E Lidsky; Zhifei Sun; Daniel P Nussbaum; Mohamed A Adam; Paul J Speicher; Dan G Blazer Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: C J Yeo; J L Cameron; K D Lillemoe; J V Sitzmann; R H Hruban; S N Goodman; W C Dooley; J Coleman; H A Pitt Journal: Ann Surg Date: 1995-06 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Joseph M Herman; Daniel T Chang; Karyn A Goodman; Avani S Dholakia; Siva P Raman; Amy Hacker-Prietz; Christine A Iacobuzio-Donahue; Mary E Griffith; Timothy M Pawlik; Jonathan S Pai; Eileen O'Reilly; George A Fisher; Aaron T Wild; Lauren M Rosati; Lei Zheng; Christopher L Wolfgang; Daniel A Laheru; Laurie A Columbo; Elizabeth A Sugar; Albert C Koong Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-12-23 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Marie K Gurka; Christine Kim; Aiwu Ruth He; Aline Charabaty; Nadim Haddad; Jenna Turocy; Lynt Johnson; Patrick Jackson; Louis M Weiner; John L Marshall; Sean P Collins; Michael J Pishvaian; Keith Unger Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Jim Zhong; Jeffrey Switchenko; Madhusmita Behera; David Kooby; Shishir K Maithel; Mark W McDonald; Jolinta Y Lin; Richard J Cassidy; Bassel El-Rayes; Jerome Landry; Pretesh R Patel Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2018-01-11 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Quisette P Janssen; Jacob L van Dam; Laura R Prakash; Deesje Doppenberg; Christopher H Crane; Casper H J van Eijck; Susannah G Ellsworth; William R Jarnagin; Eileen M O'Reilly; Alessandro Paniccia; Marsha Reyngold; Marc G Besselink; Matthew H G Katz; Ching-Wei D Tzeng; Amer H Zureikat; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Alice C Wei Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2022-07 Impact factor: 12.693
Authors: Sung Jun Ma; Lucas M Serra; Austin J Bartl; Hye Ri Han; Fatemeh Fekrmandi; Austin J Iovoli; Gregory M Hermann; Han Yu; Anurag K Singh Journal: J Radiother Pract Date: 2021-04-14
Authors: Sung Jun Ma; Lucas M Serra; Austin J Bartl; Hye Ri Han; Fatemeh Fekrmandi; Austin J Iovoli; Kavitha M Prezzano; Gregory M Hermann; Han Yu; Anurag K Singh Journal: J Radiother Pract Date: 2021-04-14
Authors: Walid L Shaib; Katerina Zakka; Asser A Shahin; Fares Yared; Jeffrey M Switchenko; Christina Wu; Mehmet Akce; Olatunji B Alese; Pretesh R Patel; Mark Mcdonald; Bassel F El-Rayes Journal: Pancreas Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: Georgios Gemenetzis; Vincent P Groot; Alex B Blair; Daniel A Laheru; Lei Zheng; Amol K Narang; Elliot K Fishman; Ralph H Hruban; Jun Yu; Richard A Burkhart; John L Cameron; Matthew J Weiss; Christopher L Wolfgang; Jin He Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 12.969