Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is potentially curative treatment for small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC), but data are limited on its efficacy and toxicity. We hypothesized that SBRT can achieve excellent local control (LC) with acceptable toxicity treating HCC lesions, even in advanced cirrhosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven nonmetastatic HCC patients received SBRT to 43 lesions between October 2012 and April 2016. Median dose was 50 Gy/5 fractions. All Child-Pugh (CP) ≥B patients underwent a planned 1-month break after the first 3 fractions to assess hepatic toxicity. Patients were treated without separately placed fiducial markers using Linac-based SBRT with breath-hold (67%) or 4D-computed tomography with compression belt (33%) to reduce motion. Patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging q3 months post-SBRT. RESULTS: Median age was 65 (range, 44 to 88). Pre-SBRT mean CP was 6.4 (range, A5 to C11). Nine (24%) had CP≥B8. Thirty-one of 33 patients (93%) had prior liver-directed therapy (median 2). Seventeen (40%) had solitary lesions. Median lesion diameter was 2.7 cm (range, 1.1 to 5.6). Median follow-up was 14 months (range, 2 to 45). There was 1 local failure (multifocal HCC with 3 prior transarterial chemoembolization). LC, freedom from liver progression, and overall survival at 12 months was 95%, 66%, 87% in the full cohort, and 100%, 76%, 93% for patients with solitary lesions. Four had grade 3 toxicity (ascites [n=2]/gastrointestinal bleed [n=1]/capsular pain [n=1]). Eight of 9 CP≥B8 patients had no grade ≥3 hepatic toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT for HCC is well-tolerated even in patients with advanced cirrhosis and prior liver-directed treatment and provides excellent LC even for larger lesions that cannot be controlled with radiofrequency ablation. LC with SBRT compares favorably to other liver-directed therapies. Prospective studies comparing SBRT with other liver-directed therapies are warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".