A comparison of clinical outcomes between simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) versus sequential boost (SEQ) intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for head and neck cancer: A meta-analysis. Issue 34 (August 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Jiang, Li; Zhang, Yong; Yang, Zhendong; Liang, Feifei; Wu, Jiangtao; Wang, Rensheng
• Other Names: Ding. Jianxun section editor.
• Is Part Of: Medicine. Volume 98:Issue 34(2019)
• Publication Date: 2019-08
• Subjects: clinical outcomes -- head and neck cancer -- meta-analysis -- SEQ-IMRT -- SIB-IMRT; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Périodiques; Geneeskunde; Medicine; Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016942
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0025-7974

Abstract

Abstract: Background: The optimal intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique for head and neck cancer (HNC) has not been determined yet. The present study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of the simultaneous integrated boost (SIB)-IMRT versus the sequential boost (SEQ)-IMRT in HNC. Methods: A meta-analysis of 7 studies involving a total of 1049 patients was carried out to compare the treatment outcomes together with severe acute adverse effects of the SIB-IMRT versus the SEQ-IMRT in HNC patients. Results: Comparison of the SIB-IMRT and SEQ-IMRT showed no significant difference in the measurement of overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.94; 95% confidence inerval [CI], 0.70–1.27; P = .71), progression free survival (PFS) (HR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82–1.30; P = .79), locoregional recurrence free survival (LRFS) (HR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.65–1.47; P = .91), and distance metastasis free survival (DMFS) (HR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.50–1.53; P = .63). Moreover, there were no significant differences in adverse effect occurrence between the SIB-IMRT and SEQ-IMRT groups. Conclusion: SIB-IMRT and SEQ-IMRT can provide comparable outcomes in the treatment of patients afflicted by HNC. Both IMRT techniques were found to carry a similar risk of severe acute adverse effect. SIB-IMRT may have advantages due to its convenience and short-course of treatment; however, the optimum fractionation and prescribed dose remained unclear. Furthermore, both IMRT techniques can be advocated as the technique of choice for HNC. Treatment plan should be individualized for patients. Abstract : Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text