Copyright
©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Clin Oncol. Feb 24, 2022; 13(2): 101-115
Published online Feb 24, 2022. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v13.i2.101
Published online Feb 24, 2022. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v13.i2.101
Ref. | Study design | Total lesions (n)/LM (n) | Mean, Dose Gy (range)/Location | SABR technique/prescription | Mean GTV (cc) (range) failing this, cm | FU (mo), median | LC | Toxicity ≥ GIII | Comments |
Nakagawa et al[11] | P | 22/12 | 22.8 (18-25)1/NR | Rotational or StaticTherapy 3D-CRT. Abdominal compression/PTV enclosing isodose. | 4.8 (0.8-13) | 10 | 100%1 | 0 | Non actuarial LC |
Hara et al[26] | P | 59/48 | 30(20-34)/Periph | Static 3D-CRT. Gating/Minimal dose to GTV | 5 (1-19) | 12(mean) | 1-yr 93% | 1 GIII | LC 52% < 30 Gy |
LC 83% ≥ 30 Gy | |||||||||
P = 0.068 | |||||||||
2-yr 78% | |||||||||
Wulf et al[54] | R | 92/31 | 26/Central | Static 3D-CRT. Abdominal compression/65-80%-isodose enclosing PTV | NR | 14 | 100% | NR | SF data are shown |
Fritz et al[53] | P | 64/31 | 30/Periph | Static 3D-CRT. Abdominal compression/Isocenter, 90% isodose enclosing GTV, 80% isodose enclosing PTV | Median: 6 (2.8-55.8)1 | 221 | 5-yr 80%1 | 0 | No difference LC and OS LM vs primary lung cancer |
Le et al [29] | Phase I | 32/11 | 22.34 (15-30)/Periph | Cyberknife. Gold fiducials.Breathold or Synchrony (Accuray) respiratory tracking system / Isodose coverage: 95% of PTV | Median: 17.1 (2-103) | 18 | 1-yr 91% (≥ 20 Gy) | 1 GIII (pn) | LC primary vs LM: 78% vs 58% |
And OS (85% vs 56%) | |||||||||
1-yr 54% (< 20 Gy) | 3 GV (central) | ||||||||
Higher toxicity in central tumors | |||||||||
Hof et al [63] | P | 0/71 | 24.35 (12-30)/NR | Static 3D-CRT. Abdominal compression/Isocenter: 80% isodose enclosing PTV | 10 (1-53) | 14 | 1-yr 88.6% | 3 GIII (pn) | LC 3 yr 78% 26-30 Gy |
2-yr 73.7% | |||||||||
3-yr 63.1% | |||||||||
Gandhidasan et al [56] | R | 186/95 | 18/Central26 or 28/Periph | Static 3D-CRT or IMRT/80% isodose enclosing PTV | NR | 22 | 2yr 84% | 0 | |
Osti et al [57] | P | 0/103 | 23Gy/Central30 Gy/Periph | Static 3D-CRT. 4DCT. 80% isodose enclosing PTV | NR | 15 | Central vs peripheral:1-yr 79.4% vs 94.7% | 2 GIII (pn) | Prognostic factors for LC: sex and histology |
Global: 1-yr 89.1%, 2-yr 82.1% | |||||||||
Filippi et al[58] | R | 0/90 | 26Gy/Periph | Static 3D-CRT or IMRT or VMAT. Abdominal compression/80% isodose enclosing PTV | < 5 cm | 24 | 1-yr 93.4% | 8 GII-IIIlate radiological toxicity | They suggest not to use a SF in lesions close to the chest wall |
2-yr 88.1% | |||||||||
6 GII-IIIchest wall toxicity | |||||||||
Siva et al [44] | R | 0/41 | 18/Central26/Periph | Static 3D-CRT or IMRT or VMAT. /70-80% isodose enclosing PTV | < 5 cm | 25 | 2-yr 93% | 0 | LC, OS and toxicity rates between SF and multi-fraction SABR |
Osti et al [59] | R | 0/166 | 30/Periph | Static 3D-CRT. 4DCT/95% isodose enclosing PTV | 3.46 (0.03-47.48) | 38 | 3-yr 80.1% | 6 GIII (pn) | Lesions ≤ 15 mm from mediastinum were not included in the study |
11 GIIIlung fibrosis | |||||||||
5-yr 79.2% | |||||||||
1 GV at 15 mm PBT | |||||||||
Sharma et al [61] | R | 32 | 30/Periph | Cyberknife. Radiopaque markers Tumor traking.70-90% isodose enclosing PTV | < 3 cm | 22 | 2-yr 68% | No details for SF | BED10 < 100, delivery of pre-SBRT chemo. and synchronous metastasis: independently < LC |
3-yr 63% | |||||||||
4-yr 59% | |||||||||
Sogono et al [60] | R | 167 (95% peripher) | 16-18/Central26-28/Periph | Static 3D-CRT or IMRT or VMAT. 4DCT/99% isodose enclosing PTV | NR | 37 | 1-yr 96% | NR | Several locations |
2-yr 92% | |||||||||
5-yr 92% | |||||||||
Siva et al[55] | Phase II | 133 | 28/NR | Static 3D-CRT or IMRT or VMAT. Abdominalo compression/70-80% isodose enclosing PTV | 2.2 cm (mean) | 12 | 1-yr 93% | 2 GIII | Preliminary results (TROG 13.01 SAFRON II) |
1-3 metastases non-central targets < 5 cm |
- Citation: Fernández C, Navarro-Martin A, Bobo A, Cabrera-Rodriguez J, Calvo P, Chicas-Sett R, Luna J, Rodríguez de Dios N, Couñago F. Single-fraction stereotactic ablative body radiation therapy for primary and metastasic lung tumor: A new paradigm? World J Clin Oncol 2022; 13(2): 101-115
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-4333/full/v13/i2/101.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5306/wjco.v13.i2.101