Particle beam therapy (PT) is a potentially promising approach to the treatment of extrahepatic biliary cancer (EBC) because of its unique dose distribution using the Bragg peak. However, the superiority of PT to photon radiotherapy (XT) remains unclear. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare PT and XT for the treatment of EBC. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), which was pooled using a random-effects model. Nine articles comprising a total of 1558 patients (seven XT articles, n = 1488 patients; two PT articles, n = 70 patients) were screened. In addition, we compared the outcomes of XT and PT with the outcomes available from a prospective data registry (proton-net). The 1-year OS probability rates were 55, 65 and 72% for the XT group, PT group and PT registry, respectively. The 2-year OS probability rates were 26, 38 and 38% for the XT group, PT group and PT registry, respectively. The 3-year OS probability rates were 12, 35 and 18% for the XT group, PT group and PT registry, respectively. Although the difference between the 1-year OS rates of the XT group and PT registry was statistically significant, no other significant superiority was observed among these groups. In conclusion, the efficacy of PT was not superior to that of XT during this meta-analysis.
Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of deep learning (DL)‐based computed tomography (CT) ventilation imaging (CTVI). Methods A total of 71 cases that underwent single‐photon emission CT 81mKr‐gas ventilation (SPECT V) and CT imaging were included. Sixty cases were assigned to the training and validation sets, and the remaining 11 cases were assigned to the test set. To directly transform three‐dimensional (3D) CT (free‐breathing CT) images to SPECT V images, a DL‐based model was implemented based on the U‐Net architecture. The input and output data were 3DCT‐ and SPECT V‐masked, respectively, except for whole‐lung volumes. These data were rearranged in voxel size, registered rigidly, cropped, and normalized in preprocessing. In addition to a standard estimation method (i.e., without dropout during the estimation process), a Monte Carlo dropout (MCD) method (i.e., with dropout during the estimation process) was used to calculate prediction uncertainty. To evaluate the two models’ (CTVIMCD U‐Net, CTVIU‐Net) performance, we used fivefold cross‐validation for the training and validation sets. To test the final model performances for both approaches, we applied the test set to each trained model and averaged the test prediction results from the five trained models to acquire the mean test result (bagging) for each approach. For the MCD method, the models were predicted repeatedly (sample size = 200), and the average and standard deviation (SD) maps were calculated in each voxel from the predicted results: The average maps were defined as test prediction results in each fold. As an evaluation index, the voxel‐wise Spearman rank correlation coefficient (Spearman rs) and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) were calculated. The DSC was calculated for three functional regions (high, moderate, and low) separated by an almost equal volume. The coefficient of variation was defined as prediction uncertainty, and these average values were calculated within three functional regions. The Wilcoxon signed‐rank test was used to test for a significant difference between the two DL‐based approaches. Results The average indexes with one SD (1SD) between CTVIMCD U‐Net and SPECT V were 0.76 ± 0.06, 0.69 ± 0.07, 0.51 ± 0.06, and 0.75 ± 0.04 for Spearman rs, DSChigh, DSCmoderate, and DSClow, respectively. The average indexes with 1SD between CTVIU‐Net and SPECT V were 0.72 ± 0.05, 0.66 ± 0.04, 0.48 ± 0.04, and 0.74 ± 0.06 for Spearman rs, DSChigh, DSCmoderate, and DSClow, respectively. These indexes between CTVIMCD U‐Net and CTVIU‐Net showed no significance difference (Spearman rs, p = 0.175; DSChigh, p = 0.123; DSCmoderate, p = 0.278; DSClow, p = 0.520). The average coefficient of variations with 1SD were 0.27 ± 0.00, 0.27 ± 0.01, and 0.36 ± 0.03 for the high‐, moderate‐, and low‐functional regions, respectively, and the low‐functional region showed a tendency to exhibit larger uncertainties than the others. Conclusion We evaluated DL‐based framework for estimating lung‐functional ventilation images only from CT image...
Background: Esophagectomy is the standard adjuvant treatment for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC) following noncurative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, recent reports have also shown that ESD with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has promising results. This retrospective study aimed to elucidate the efficacy of CRT compared to surgery in patients with SESCC after noncurative ESD.Methods: This study retrospectively compared the long-term outcomes of patients who received adjuvant treatment with surgery or CRT after noncurative ESD for SESCC.Results: Data were collected from 60 patients who developed SESCC after noncurative ESD, 34 of whom received adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and 26 underwent esophagectomy. The median follow-up periods were 46 and 56 months in the CRT and esophagectomy groups, respectively. The median patient age was significantly higher in the CRT group than in the esophagectomy group (69 vs. 65 years, p = 0.0054). CRT was completed in all patients, and the incidence of grade ≥3 nonhematologic adverse events was 6%. The overall and disease-free survival did not significantly differ between the two groups.Conclusions: CRT following ESD seems a promising nonsurgical strategy for optimizing the selection of therapies for high-risk SESCC.
Introduction:The study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dose-escalated stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for primary lung cancer. Methods:Patients with peripherally located T1-2N0M0 primary lung cancer who underwent SBRT from April 2013 to December 2019 were included. Group A received 60 Gy in five fractions with CyberKnife prescribed at 99% gross tumor volume. Group B received 48 Gy in four fractions by a gantry-mounted linear accelerator, with isocenter prescription. Cumulative incidence of local failure (LF), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity were retrospectively compared.Results: Groups A and B comprised 39 and 36 patients, respectively. Group A had more patients without histological confirmation (p < .001) and showed lower V20 of bilateral lungs (p = .025). The median follow-up duration of Group A and B was 22.0 and 21.5 months, respectively, and the 2-year cumulative incidence of LF, PFS, and OS were .0% versus 11.6% (p = .065), 66.2% versus 62.7% (p = .694), 84.1% versus 81.1% (p = .827), respectively. There was no difference in Grade ≥ 2 toxicity rate between Groups A and B (7.7% vs. 11.1%; p = .704). Conclusion:Dose-escalated SBRT using CyberKnife showed reduced lung dose and potential benefits for improved local control with comparable toxicity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.