TY - JOUR
T1 - COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF PROTON BEAM VERSUS PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY TO SPARE THE VISION IN CIRCUMSCRIBED CHOROIDAL HEMANGIOMA
AU - Mathis, Thibaud
AU - Maschi, Célia
AU - Mosci, Carlo
AU - Espensen, Charlotte A
AU - Rosier, Laurence
AU - Favard, Catherine
AU - Tick, Sarah
AU - Remignon, Charles-Henry
AU - Ligorio, Paolo
AU - Bonin, Nicolas
AU - Gambrelle, Joël
AU - Nguyen, Anh-Minh
AU - Faber, Carsten
AU - Meyer, Laurent
AU - Mouriaux, Frederic
AU - Herault, Joël
AU - Baillif, Stéphanie
AU - Kiilgaard, Jens-Folke
AU - Kodjikian, Laurent
AU - Caujolle, Jean-Pierre
AU - Salleron, Julia
AU - Thariat, Juliette
PY - 2021/2/1
Y1 - 2021/2/1
N2 - PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the functional and anatomical effectiveness of photodynamic therapy (PDT) versus proton beam therapy (PBT) in a real-life setting for the treatment of circumscribed choroidal hemangioma.METHODS: A total of 191 patients with a diagnosis of circumscribed choroidal hemangioma and treated by PBT or PDT were included for analyses.RESULTS: The 119 patients (62.3%) treated by PDT were compared with the 72 patients treated by PBT. The final best-corrected visual acuity did not differ significantly between the two groups (P = 0.932) and final thickness was lower in the PBT compared with the PDT group (P = 0.001). None of the patients treated by PBT needed second-line therapy. In comparison, 53 patients (44.5%) initially treated by PDT required at least one other therapy and were associated with worse final best-corrected visual acuity (P = 0.037). In multivariate analysis, only an initial thickness greater than 3 mm remained significant (P = 0.01) to predict PDT failure with an estimated odds ratio of 2.72, 95% confidence interval (1.25-5.89).CONCLUSION: Photodynamic therapy and PBT provide similar anatomical and functional outcomes for circumscribed choroidal hemangioma ≤3 mm, although multiple sessions are sometimes required for PDT. For tumors >3 mm, PBT seems preferable because it can treat the tumor in only 1 session with better functional and anatomical outcomes.
AB - PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the functional and anatomical effectiveness of photodynamic therapy (PDT) versus proton beam therapy (PBT) in a real-life setting for the treatment of circumscribed choroidal hemangioma.METHODS: A total of 191 patients with a diagnosis of circumscribed choroidal hemangioma and treated by PBT or PDT were included for analyses.RESULTS: The 119 patients (62.3%) treated by PDT were compared with the 72 patients treated by PBT. The final best-corrected visual acuity did not differ significantly between the two groups (P = 0.932) and final thickness was lower in the PBT compared with the PDT group (P = 0.001). None of the patients treated by PBT needed second-line therapy. In comparison, 53 patients (44.5%) initially treated by PDT required at least one other therapy and were associated with worse final best-corrected visual acuity (P = 0.037). In multivariate analysis, only an initial thickness greater than 3 mm remained significant (P = 0.01) to predict PDT failure with an estimated odds ratio of 2.72, 95% confidence interval (1.25-5.89).CONCLUSION: Photodynamic therapy and PBT provide similar anatomical and functional outcomes for circumscribed choroidal hemangioma ≤3 mm, although multiple sessions are sometimes required for PDT. For tumors >3 mm, PBT seems preferable because it can treat the tumor in only 1 session with better functional and anatomical outcomes.
KW - circumscribed choroidal hemangioma
KW - ocular oncology
KW - photodynamic therapy
KW - proton beam therapy
KW - radiation therapy
KW - Protons
KW - Photosensitizing Agents/therapeutic use
KW - Fluorescein Angiography/methods
KW - Choroid Neoplasms/diagnosis
KW - Follow-Up Studies
KW - Tomography, Optical Coherence
KW - Humans
KW - Middle Aged
KW - Male
KW - Photochemotherapy/methods
KW - Treatment Outcome
KW - Choroid/pathology
KW - Visual Acuity
KW - Porphyrins/therapeutic use
KW - Hemangioma/diagnosis
KW - Female
KW - Retrospective Studies
KW - Verteporfin/therapeutic use
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85100224286&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/IAE.0000000000002843
DO - 10.1097/IAE.0000000000002843
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 32404844
SN - 0275-004X
VL - 41
SP - 277
EP - 286
JO - Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.)
JF - Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.)
IS - 2
ER -