Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Prospective registry and meta-analysis evaluate particle therapy’s efficacy in hepatocellular carcinoma, highlighting its real-world implications.
Background and Aims This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of particle therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by integrating a prospective registry and a systematic meta‐analysis. Our findings also reflect the real‐world impact of this evidence, which contributed to the national health insurance approval of particle therapy for HCC tumors ≥ 4 cm in Japan. Methods Patients who received particle therapy for HCC from May 2016 to June 2018 were registered. Ninety studies (25 particle therapy, 26 non‐SBRT, 36 SBRT, 3 studies reporting multiple modalities) were selected. Results A total of 836 cases (proton beam therapy 576, carbon therapy 260) were examined. The median overall survival (OS) was 53.7 months (95% CI 47.4‐NA). The 1‐, 2‐, 3‐ and 4‐year OS rates were 85.2% (95% CI 82.6%–87.4%), 71.4% (68.1%–74.4%), 60.5% (56.9%–63.9%), and 53.5% (49.1%–57.7%), respectively; and the 1‐, 2‐, 3‐ and 4‐year local recurrence rates were 3.5% (2.1%–4.9%), 8.8% (6.3%–10.8%), 12.0% (9.3%–14.8%), and 13.6% (10.5%–16.7%), respectively. In the meta‐analysis and registry data, the 1‐, 2‐, and 3‐year OS rates of particle therapy and SBRT for small HCC (< 4 cm) were 90.0%/87.7% ( p = 0.4788), 75.3%/73.6% ( p = 0.6724), and 62.8%/63.5% ( p = 0.9771), respectively; and the 1‐, 2‐, and 3‐year OS rates of particle therapy, SBRT and non‐SBRT for large HCC (≥ 4 cm) were 81.1%/62.0% ( p = 0.0032)/66.8% ( p = 0.0021), 65.4%/38.1% ( p = 0.0001)/38.4% ( p = 0.0001), and 50.4%/31.8% ( p = 0.0001)/25.9% ( p = 0.0001), respectively. Conclusions A prospective registry study and meta‐analysis indicated that particle therapy is a better treatment modality than SBRT for large HCC. Particle therapy and SBRT gave similar outcomes for small HCC. These findings contributed to the adoption of particle therapy for tumors ≥ 4 cm under Japan's national health insurance, highlighting its real‐world impact.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mizumoto et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: