Skip to main content
. 2018 Dec 20;6(5):346–353. doi: 10.1093/nop/npy053

Table 1.

Summary of Included Studies

Study ID No. Patients (No. Tumors) Median Age Tumor size (cc)
Median (Range)
Tumor Grade Treatment Platform Dose and Fractionation
(Gy/fractions)
Median Dose (Gy) IDL Prescribed To Crude Local Control (%) Late Toxicity (%)
Marchetti
201614
143 (143) 52 8
(0.1-126)
50% Grade I
50% presumed Grade I
CK 14-25/3-5 25 65%-86% 95 4.9
Demiral
201615
19 (19) 40 26
(4-103)
100% Grade I LINAC 25/5 25 85%-95% N/R 21.1
Conti
201512
25 (25) N/R 5
(0.3-19)
N/R CK 18/2
18-21/3
20-22/4
23-25/5
N/R 63%-80% 100 8
Haghighi
201511
57 (57) N/R 7
(N/R)
38% Grade I
4% Grade II
58% presumed Grade I
LINAC 37.5-40/15 N/R 75%-100% 93 14
Maranzano
201520
77 (80) 65 23
(1-110)
46% Grade I
15% Grade II
39% presumed Grade I
LINAC 45/15
42/14
43.5 90%
(median)
N/R 0
Navarria 20159 26 (27) 67 13
(2-93)
N/R LINAC 30/5 N/R N/R 100 N/R
Han
201419
22 (22) 62 N/R N/R LINAC 25/5 N/R 90% (median) 100 0
Kaul
201410
92 (92) N/R N/R 89% Grade I or presumed Grade I
11% Grade II or III
LINAC 37.6 ± 4.4 Gy total dose; 2.2-5 Gy/fraction N/R 80%
(median)
N/R N/R
Smith
2014
(abstract)18
24 (26) 60
(mean)
N/R N/R CK 22.5-30/5 N/R N/R 100 8.3
Marchetti
201113
21 (21) 58 3
(0.3-23)
N/R CK 25/5 25 75%-85% 100 9.5
Morimoto
201117
31 (32) 68 N/R 100% Grade I or presumed Grade I CK 21-36/3-5 28 90%-100% 91 9.7
Trippa
200916
35 (35) 59 23
(4-58)
94% Grade I or presumed Grade I
6% Grade II
LINAC 45/15
42/14
N/R N/R N/R 0
Gorman
20087
38 (39) 56 N/R 96% Grade I or presumed Grade I
4% Grade II
LINAC 35-45/15 37.5 75%-90%
80%
(median)
100 15.8
Pham
20048
20 (20) 53 6
(2-19)
N/R CK 15-30/2-5 20 67%-95% 90 0

Abbreviations: CK, CyberKnife; IDL, isodose level; LINAC, linear accelerator; N/R, not reported.