366 / 1082
S351
ESTRO 36 2017
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
11]. This checklist consists of minimum criteria that
cancer clinical trials should incorporate to provide reliable
HRQoL outcomes. The 11 items are categorized into
conceptual,
measurement,
methodology
and
interpretation domains. All included studies were scored
for adherence to the checklist. Each item that met the
criteria received 1 point with a maximum of 11 points.
Outcomes range from ‘probably robust’ (8 – 11) to ‘very
limited’ (0 – 4).
Results
From 2005-2015, out of 225 publications reviewed, 16 LA-
NSCLC clinical trials (represented in 25 articles)
incorporated HRQoL endpoints. Radiotherapy was
evaluated, in combination with surgery, systemic therapy
or with medication aiming to reduce adverse radiotherapy
effects, and impact on HRQoL was assessed.
None of the studies had a methodological quality below 4
(‘very limited’). The average quality score of HRQoL
reporting in all studies was 7.875, with 13 studies
considered to be of high quality (‘probably robust’), versus
3 studies of average quality (‘limited robust’). No studies
fulfilled all criteria.
Particularly, details on a priori hypothesis (n=16) and
details on missing data (n=9) were missing. Additionally,
clinical significance rather than simple statistical
significance was often unaddressed (n=13).
Conclusion
Qualitative reporting of HRQoL outcomes in scientific
articles is a crucial aspect to adequately interpret HRQoL
results, with the aim to facilitate daily clinical decision
making and support therapy policies. In this review, only
the minority of clinical trials fulfilled the minimum criteria
for adequate HRQoL reporting. Due to the limited
methodological quality and especially the fact that certain
crucial aspects of HRQoL data reporting are lacking in the
studies, good interpretation of HRQoL data remains
difficult.
Poster: Clinical track: Upper GI (oesophagus, stomach,
pancreas, liver)
PO-0679 Role of Chemoradiation Therapy as an Initial
Treatment for Esophageal Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis
M. MA
1
, X.S. Gao
1
, X. Gu
1
1
Peking University First Hospital, Radiation Oncology,
Beijing, China
Purpose or Objective
This study was aimed to compare the therapeutic
efficacy of definitive chemoradiotherapy(dCRT) and
esophagectomy as initial treatment for resectable
oesophageal cancer by meta-analysis.
Material and Methods
Databases of Pubmed and Web of Science were
systematically searched to identify relevant studies.
Combined odds ratio(OR) and 95% confidential interval (CI)
were computed to assess the comparison effects.
Results
A total of thirteen studies (2 RCTs and 11 non-RCTs) with
2071 patients were identified, consisting of the dCRT arm
(n=869) and surgery arm (n=1202). There was no
statistically significant benefit on 1-year (OR 1.23, 0.67 to
2.24; P=0.50), 3-year (OR 1.022, 0.795 to 1.312; P=0.87)
and 5-year overall survival (OR 1.05, 0.82 to 1.35; P = 0.68)
for surgery compared with dCRT(Fig.A). As for disease-
free survival (DFS). dCRT is relatively inferior than surgery
in short term result (OR for 3-year PFS: 1.37, 1.03 to 1.82;
p=0.03) but is equivocal with surgery in long-term result
(OR for 5-year PFS: 1.06, 0.79 to 1.42; p=0.70).
Additionally, patients with positive lymph node could
benefit on 5-year OS from dCRT (OR 0.238, 0.079 to 0.717;
P=0.011)(Fig.B). Subgroup analysis for Asian and North
American patients indidates that surgery is superior on 2-
year OS as compared with dCRT among North American
patients(Fig.C). OR of 2-year OS for Asian patients and
North American patients were 1.001, (95% CI 0.693 to
1.446; P=0.996) and 1.552, (95% CI 1.035 to 2.238;
P=0.033), repectively. Furthermore, we analysed 5 studies
consisting a total of 1202 patients which focused on stage
I esophageal cancer, no statistically difference was found
between dCRT and surgery on 2-year OS (OR 1.279, 0.704
to 2.35; p=0.419)(Fig.D).
Conclusion
In summary, therapeutic effects of dCRT as the initial
treatment is similar to that of surgery on long-term
survivals and it remains equivalent with surgical resection
for patients with stage I esophageal cancer. Patients with
positive lymph node may benefit from dCRT. More
randomized trials are needed to confirm our results.
PO-0680 SBRT for locally advanced pancreatic cancer
(LAPC): a retrospective multi-institutional experience
G. Macchia
1
, A. Arcelli
2
, A.G. Morganti
2
, F. Bertini
2
, A.
Guido
2
, L. Fuccio
3
, F. Dalla Torre
1
, S. Cilla
4
, V. Scotti
5
,
M.E. Rosetto
6
, I. Djan
7
, S. Parisi
8
, G.C. Mattiucci
9
, V.
Valentini
9
, M. Fiore
10
, P. Bonomo
11
, A. Bacigalupo
12
, R.M.
Niespolo
13
, P. Gabriele
14
, F. Deodato
1
1
Fondazione di Ricerca e Cura “Giovanni Paolo II”,
Radiotherapy Unit, Campobasso, Italy
2
University of Bologna, Radiation Oncology Center-
Department of Experimental- Diagnostic and Specialty
Medicine - DIMES, Bologna, Italy
3
University of Bologna, Department of Medical and
Surgical Sciences - DIMEC, Bologna, Italy
4
Fondazione di Ricerca e Cura “Giovanni Paolo II”,
Medical Physic Unit, Campobasso, Italy
5
Radiosurgery Center Malzoni, Radiosurgery Center,
Agropoli, Italy
6
Ospedale Belcolle, Radiotherapy Unit, Viterbo, Italy
7
Medical Faculty- University of Novi Sad, Institute of
Oncology Vojvodina- Sremska Kamenica, Serbia, Serbia
8
Ospedale Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza San Giovanni
Rotondo, Radiotherapy Unit, Foggia, Italy
9
Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli”- Università
Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Department of Radiotherapy,
Rome, Italy
10
Università Campus Biomedico, Department of
Radiotherapy, Rome, Italy
11
Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi AOUC,
Dpartment of Radiotherapy, Firenze, Italy
12
IRCCS AOU San Martino– IST, Department of
Radiotherapy, Genova, Italy
13
Azienda Ospedaliera San Gerardo, Radiotherapy Unit,
Monza, Italy
14
Fondazione del Piemonte per l'Oncologia FPO- IRCCS
Candiolo, Department of Radiotherapy, Torino, Italy