TY - JOUR
T1 - Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy, Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy, and Brachytherapy Boost Modalities in Invasive Cervical Cancer
T2 - A Study of the National Cancer Data Base
AU - O'Donnell, Barrett
AU - Shiao, Jay C.
AU - Pezzi, Todd A.
AU - Waheed, Nabila
AU - Sharma, Shelly
AU - Bonnen, Mark D.
AU - Ludwig, Michelle S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Copyright 2017 by IGCS and ESGO.
PY - 2018/3/1
Y1 - 2018/3/1
N2 - Background and Purpose: Our objective was to determine whether stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and brachytherapy boost techniques have comparable overall survival in treating cervical cancer when adjusted for known prognostic factors. Materials and Methods We used the National Cancer Database to study women with invasive cervical cancer who were treated with radiation between 2004 and 2013. A logistic regression model was built to identify factors associated with the receipt of SBRT and IMRT. Outcomes were compared using Kaplan-Meier and propensity score matching. Results: Of all 15,905 patients, 14,394 (90.5%) received brachytherapy, 42 (0.8%) received SBRT, and 1468 (9.2%) received IMRT. After propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) for patients who received SBRT boost versus brachytherapy boost (hazard ratio = 1.477, 95% confidence interval = 0.746-2.926, P = 0.263) but a significant OS detriment in patients who received IMRT boost versus brachytherapy boost (hazard ratio = 1.455, 95% confidence interval = 1.300-1.628, P < 0.001). Conclusions: In a propensity-matched analysis, those who received SBRT boost had equal OS when compared with brachytherapy, but those who received IMRT boost had worse OS when compared with brachytherapy.
AB - Background and Purpose: Our objective was to determine whether stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and brachytherapy boost techniques have comparable overall survival in treating cervical cancer when adjusted for known prognostic factors. Materials and Methods We used the National Cancer Database to study women with invasive cervical cancer who were treated with radiation between 2004 and 2013. A logistic regression model was built to identify factors associated with the receipt of SBRT and IMRT. Outcomes were compared using Kaplan-Meier and propensity score matching. Results: Of all 15,905 patients, 14,394 (90.5%) received brachytherapy, 42 (0.8%) received SBRT, and 1468 (9.2%) received IMRT. After propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) for patients who received SBRT boost versus brachytherapy boost (hazard ratio = 1.477, 95% confidence interval = 0.746-2.926, P = 0.263) but a significant OS detriment in patients who received IMRT boost versus brachytherapy boost (hazard ratio = 1.455, 95% confidence interval = 1.300-1.628, P < 0.001). Conclusions: In a propensity-matched analysis, those who received SBRT boost had equal OS when compared with brachytherapy, but those who received IMRT boost had worse OS when compared with brachytherapy.
KW - Biological effective dose
KW - Boost
KW - Brachytherapy
KW - Cervical cancer
KW - IMRT
KW - Image-guided radiation therapy
KW - SBRT
KW - Survival
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042848013&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85042848013&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/IGC.0000000000001200
DO - 10.1097/IGC.0000000000001200
M3 - Article
C2 - 29324547
AN - SCOPUS:85042848013
SN - 1048-891X
VL - 28
SP - 563
EP - 574
JO - International Journal of Gynecological Cancer
JF - International Journal of Gynecological Cancer
IS - 3
ER -