Nephron-Sparing Robotic Radiosurgical Therapy for Primary Renal Cell Carcinoma: Single-Institution Experience and Review of the Literature
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
PURPOSE: We report our single-institution stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) experience on stage I renal cancer with prospectively collected toxicity and efficacy data. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 21 patients with solitary renal tumors, including 14 surgical candidates who refused surgery (66%), were treated with SBRT. Histologic confirmation was obtained on all patients before treatment; 2 had transitional cell carcinoma and 19 had renal cell carcinoma. The median age was 71 years (range, 58-88). Nearly all patients received 48 Gy in 3 fractions. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 78 months (range, 5-107). At 5 years post treatment, the local tumor control rate was 100%. Tumor size decreased by a median value of 5.3% at 1 year post treatment, 15.6% at 2 years post treatment, and 15.4% at 5 years post treatment. Glomerular filtration rate had decreased by a median value of 1.5% at 1 year post treatment, 7.0% at 2 years post treatment, and 14.2% at 5 years post treatment. Three patients experienced grade 1 toxicity; no other treatment-related adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT is a promising noninvasive treatment in the management of primary renal cell carcinoma, with evolving clinical evidence demonstrating encouraging results with respect to local control and toxicity.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Nephron-Sparing Robotic Radiosurgical Therapy for Primary Renal Cell Carcinoma: Single-Institution Experience and Review of the Literature
- Date Crossref
- 01/03/2020
- Éditeur
- Elsevier BV
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.