Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy vs Sorafenib Alone in Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Most patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recur within the liver following systemic therapy. Objective: To determine whether stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) improves outcomes in patients with locally advanced HCC compared with sorafenib alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter phase 3 randomized clinical trial randomized patients with HCC 1:1 to sorafenib or SBRT followed by sorafenib, stratified by performance status, liver function, degree of metastases, and macrovascular invasion. Eligible patients had HCC unsuitable for or refractory to standard local-regional therapies and were candidates for first-line systemic therapy. Data were collected from April 2013 to March 2021, and data were analyzed from July 2022 to August 2023. Intervention: Personalized SBRT, 27.5 to 50 Gy in 5 fractions. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events, and quality of life. Results: Of 193 patients randomized, 177 were eligible. Accrual was stopped early due to a change in standard-of-care systemic therapy. Of 177 included patients, 150 (84.7%) were male, and the median (IQR) age was 66 (60-72) years. Macrovascular invasion was seen in 131 (74.0%). As of July 1, 2022, the median OS was 12.3 months (90% CI, 10.6-14.3) with sorafenib vs 15.8 months (90% CI, 11.4-19.2) following SBRT and sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 90% CI, 0.59-1.01; 1-sided P = .06). Adjusting for stratification factors, OS was improved with SBRT (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-0.99; 2-sided P = .04). Median PFS was improved from 5.5 months (95% CI, 3.4-6.3) with sorafenib to 9.2 months (95% CI, 7.5-11.9) with SBRT and sorafenib (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.40-0.75; 2-sided P < .001). Treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events were seen in 37 of 88 (42%) and 39 of 83 (47%) of patients treated with sorafenib vs SBRT and sorafenib, respectively (P = .52). There were 2 treatment-related deaths in the sorafenib group (death not otherwise specified and liver failure) and 1 in the SBRT and sorafenib group (lung infection). At 6 months, improved quality of life was seen in 2 of 20 (10%) and 6 of 17 (35%) of patients treated with sorafenib and SBRT and sorafenib, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, among patients with locally advanced HCC, SBRT was associated with a clinically important but not statistically significant improved overall survival compared with sorafenib alone. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01730937.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».