https://www.selleckchem.com/products/Sodium-valproate.html Patients who received CFRT were older, smoked more often concurrently with treatment, had higher ECOG performance status, different T and N stage patterns, and more commonly received concurrent chemoradiotherapy and prophylactic cranial irradiation. After propensity score matching for these differences, 72 patients were included, 36 in the HFRT and CFRT cohorts respectively. There was no difference in OS (P=0.724), PFS (P=0.862), any pulmonary (P=0.350), or esophageal (P=0.097) adverse events between cohorts. Skin adverse events were significantly higher for CFRT (41.7%) compared with HFRT (16.7%, P=0.020). Multivariable Cox regression also revealed no differences in OS (P=0.886) or PFS (P=0.717) between all HFRT and CFRT patients, without matching. No grade 5 adverse events were observed. Conclusion In LS-SCLC patients, HFRT was associated with comparable survival and toxicity outcomes and may be considered as an alternative to CFRT, should its efficacy be confirmed in prospective studies.Purpose Oligorecurrent prostate cancer has historically been treated with indefinite androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), although many patients and providers opt to defer this treatment at time of recurrence given quality-of-life and/or comorbidity considerations. Recently, metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) has emerged as a potential intermediary between surveillance and immediate continuous ADT. Simultaneously, "advanced" systemic therapy, in addition to ADT, has also been shown to improve survival in metastatic hormone-sensitive disease. This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of treating oligorecurrent patients with upfront MDT prior to standard-of-care systemic therapy. Methods A Markov-based cost-effectiveness analysis was constructed comparing three strategies (1) upfront MDT → salvage abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP)+ADT → salvage docetaxel+ADT, (2) upfront AAP+ADT → salvage docetaxel+ADT, and (3