Radiosurgery Compared with External Radiation Therapy as a Primary Treatment in Spine Metastasis from Hepatocellular Carcinoma : A Multicenter, Matched-Pair Study.
10.3340/jkns.2016.59.1.37
- Author:
Seil SOHN
1
;
Chun Kee CHUNG
;
Moon Jun SOHN
;
Sung Hwan KIM
;
Jinhee KIM
;
Eunjung PARK
Author Information
1. Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. chungc@snu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Multicenter Study ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Radiosurgery;
Radiation therapy;
Spine;
Metastasis;
Hepatocellular carcinoma
- MeSH:
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular*;
Classification;
Disease-Free Survival;
Humans;
Neoplasm Metastasis*;
Radiosurgery*;
Spine*;
Visual Analog Scale
- From:Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
2016;59(1):37-43
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicenter, matched-pair study was to compare the outcomes of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and conventional external radiation therapy (RT) when used as a primary treatment in spine metastasis from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: From 2005 to 2012, 28 patients underwent SRS as the primary treatment in spine metastasis from HCC. Based on sex, age, number of spine metastasis, Child-Pugh classification, interval from original tumor to spine metastasis, and year of treatment, 28 patients who underwent RT were paired. Outcomes of interest were pain relief, progression free survival, toxicities, and further treatment. RESULTS: The perioperative visual analog scale (VAS) decrease was larger in SRS group than in RT group, but the difference was not significant (3.7 vs. 2.8, p=0.13). When pain medication was adjusted, the number of patients with complete (n=6 vs.3) or partial (n=12 vs.13) relief was larger in SRS group than in RT group; however, the difference was not significant (p=0.83). There was no significant difference in progression free survival (p=0.48). In SRS group, 32.1% of patients had 1 or more toxicities whereas the percentage in RT group was 63.0%, a significant difference (p=0.04). Six SRS patients and 7 RT patients received further intervention at the treated segment. CONCLUSION: Clinical and radiological outcome were not significantly different between the two treatments. Toxicities, however, were more prevalent in the RT group.
