Cited 0 times in

Upfront Versus Delayed Systemic Therapy in Patients With Oligometastatic Cancer Treated With SABR in the Phase 2 SABR-5 Trial

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author장지석-
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-04T02:40:38Z-
dc.date.available2024-10-04T02:40:38Z-
dc.date.issued2024-04-
dc.identifier.issn0360-3016-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/200554-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The optimal sequencing of local and systemic therapy for oligometastatic cancer has not been established. This study retrospectively compared progression -free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and SABR-related toxicity between upfront versus delay of systemic treatment until progression in patients in the SABR-5 trial. Methods and Materials: The single-arm phase 2 SABR-5 trial accrued patients with up to 5 oligometastases across SABR-5 between November 2016 and July 2020. Patients received SABR to all lesions. Two cohorts were retrospectively identified: those receiving upfront systemic treatment along with SABR and those for whom systemic treatment was delayed until disease progression. Patients treated for oligoprogression were excluded. Propensity score analysis with overlap weighting balanced baseline characteristics of cohorts. Bootstrap sampling and Cox regression models estimated the association of delayed systemic treatment with PFS, OS, and grade >= 2 toxicity. Results: A total of 319 patients with oligometastases underwent treatment on SABR-5, including 121 (38%) and 198 (62%) who received upfront and delayed systemic treatment, respectively. In the weighted sample, prostate cancer was the most common primary tumor histology (48%) followed by colorectal (18%), breast (13%), and lung (4%). Most patients (93%) were treated for 1 to 2 metastases. The median follow-up time was 34 months (IQR, 24-45). Delayed systemic treatment was associated with shorter PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.56; 95% CI, 1.15-2.13; P = .005) but similar OS (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.51-1.59; P = .65) compared with upfront systemic treatment. Risk of grade 2 or higher SABR-related toxicity was reduced with delayed systemic treatment (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.70; P < .001). Conclusions: Delayed systemic treatment is associated with shorter PFS without reduction in OS and with reduced SABR-related toxicity and may be a favorable option for select patients seeking to avoid initial systemic treatment. Efforts should continue to accrue patients to histology -specific trials examining a delayed systemic treatment approach.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityrestriction-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherElsevier Science Inc.-
dc.relation.isPartOfINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHMale-
dc.subject.MESHProgression-Free Survival-
dc.subject.MESHProstatic Neoplasms* / pathology-
dc.subject.MESHRadiosurgery* / methods-
dc.subject.MESHRetrospective Studies-
dc.titleUpfront Versus Delayed Systemic Therapy in Patients With Oligometastatic Cancer Treated With SABR in the Phase 2 SABR-5 Trial-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Radiation Oncology (방사선종양학교실)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSarah Baker-
dc.contributor.googleauthorLinden Lechner-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMitchell Liu-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJee Suk Chang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorElla Mae Cruz-Lim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorBen Mou-
dc.contributor.googleauthorWill Jiang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorAlanah Bergman-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDevin Schellenberg-
dc.contributor.googleauthorAbraham Alexander-
dc.contributor.googleauthorTanya Berrang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorAndrew Bang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorNick Chng-
dc.contributor.googleauthorQuinn Matthews-
dc.contributor.googleauthorHannah Carolan-
dc.contributor.googleauthorFred Hsu-
dc.contributor.googleauthorStacey Miller-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSiavash Atrchian-
dc.contributor.googleauthorElisa Chan-
dc.contributor.googleauthorClement Ho-
dc.contributor.googleauthorIslam Mohamed-
dc.contributor.googleauthorAngela Lin-
dc.contributor.googleauthorVicky Huang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorAnte Mestrovic-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDerek Hyde-
dc.contributor.googleauthorChad Lund-
dc.contributor.googleauthorHoward Pai-
dc.contributor.googleauthorBoris Valev-
dc.contributor.googleauthorShilo Lefresne-
dc.contributor.googleauthorGregory Arbour-
dc.contributor.googleauthorIrene Yu-
dc.contributor.googleauthorScott Tyldesley-
dc.contributor.googleauthorRob A Olson-
dc.identifier.doi38220069-
dc.contributor.localIdA04658-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ01157-
dc.identifier.eissn1879-355X-
dc.identifier.pmid10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.01.008-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360301624000178-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameChang, Jee Suk-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor장지석-
dc.citation.volume118-
dc.citation.number5-
dc.citation.startPage1497-
dc.citation.endPage1506-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, Vol.118(5) : 1497-1506, 2024-04-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Radiation Oncology (방사선종양학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.