%0 Journal Article
%T Is Escalated Radiation Dose in Definitive Chemoradiotherapy Better for Inoperable Esophageal Carcinoma? A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
%A Xiaochuan Gan
%A Qitao Gou
%A Jing Zhu
%A Tao Zhang
%J Advances in Bioscience and Biotechnology
%P 172-189
%@ 2156-8502
%D 2023
%I Scientific Research Publishing
%R 10.4236/abb.2023.144012
%X <b><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">Purpose: </span></b><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">This study aimed to compare
the survival benefits between different total radiation doses in definitive
chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) for inoperable esophageal carcinoma (EC) based on
modern radiotherapy techniques.<b> Methods:</b> A systematic review was
performed by searching the databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central
Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science. All studies published prior
to November 30, 2022</span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">,</span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\"> comparing radiation dose and disease-related outcomes in EC patients. The
hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio (OR) were used to describe the risk of
outcomes and toxicities.<b> Results: </b>Seven prospective trials involving
1124EC patients were enrolled for analyses. The results revealed that the
effect on overall survival (HR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.85</span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\"> - </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">1.16, P = 0.94), local progression-free survival (HR
= 0.83, 95% CI = 0.58</span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\"> - </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">1.17, P =
0.29), local regional progression-free survival</span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\"> </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">(HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.76</span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\"> - </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">1.17, P = 0.61), progression-free survival (HR =
0.90, 95% CI = 0.71</span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\"> - </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">1.13, P =
0.35) was similar in the high-dose and standard-dose groups. Additionally, a
high radiation dose exhibited </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">a </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">potential
disadvantage in respiratory toxicities when compared with a standard dose (4.8%
vs 2.2%, OR 2.11, P</span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\"> </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">=</span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\"> </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">0.06). <b>Conclusions: </b>The efficacy of the HD
group (</span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">¡Ý60</span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\"> </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">Gy) and
the SD group (approximately 50 Gy) for inoperable local advanced EC was
similar. However, the HD group exhibited a high radiation dose exhibited </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">a </span><span style=\"font-family:;\" \"=\"\">potential
%K Esophageal Carcinoma
%K Chemoradiotherapy
%K High-Dose
%K Low-Dose
%K Meta-Analysis
%U http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=124587