Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional external beam radiotherapy for bone metastases: a meta-analysis

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) are widely used treatment options for the management of painful bone metastases. Randomized phase III trials have provided direct comparative evidence for SBRT and cEBRT; however, their results vary according to treatment regimen and clinical endpoint, supporting a broader quantitative synthesis of pain response, local control, retreatment, and safety outcomes. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar from database inception through January 2026. Comparative clinical studies evaluating SBRT versus cEBRT for bone metastases were included. Outcomes assessed encompassed pain-related measures (change in Visual Analog Scale scores at 3 and 6 months; complete, partial, stable, and progressive pain response), opioid consumption at 3 and 6 months, radiologic local progression or treatment failure at 8 months, re-irradiation at 12 months, skeletal-related events (vertebral and non-vertebral compression fractures), spinal cord compression, treatment-related toxicity, and overall survival at 1 year. Pooled analyses were performed using random-effects models. Early pain reduction at 3 months, partial and stable pain response, and opioid consumption at 3 and 6 months were comparable between SBRT and cEBRT (all p > 0.05). However, SBRT demonstrated superior mid-term outcomes, with a significantly higher complete pain response at 6 months (RR = 1.43; p = 0.001) and a significantly lower rate of progressive pain response at 6 months (RR = 0.61; p = 0.03). SBRT was also associated with markedly improved local disease control, reflected by lower rates of radiologic local progression or treatment failure at 8 months (RR = 0.36; p < 0.001) and a substantially reduced need for re-irradiation at 12 months (RR = 0.13; p < 0.001). Rates of vertebral and non-vertebral compression fractures, spinal cord compression, treatment-related toxicity, and overall survival at 1 year did not differ significantly between treatment modalities. This meta-analysis demonstrates that both SBRT and cEBRT are safe and effective treatment options for patients with painful bone metastases. While early pain palliation and safety outcomes are comparable, SBRT provides superior durability of pain control, reduced pain progression, improved local tumor control, and a markedly lower need for re-irradiation. SBRT may be particularly advantageous for patients with longer expected survival, oligometastatic disease, or lesions at higher risk of progression, whereas cEBRT remains an effective and accessible option for rapid symptom palliation in patients with limited prognosis.

Marc Boutros, Jean-Pierre Saad, Guy Awad, Kamal Bou Hamdan, William Eward

Leverage2 / 5

Reusable within one subfield (a technique, dataset, or protocol a few groups will adopt).

10% of this desk’s rubric

Magnitude3 / 5

Large gain: roughly 2x, or a clear new state of the art on a hard, unsaturated problem.

20% of this desk’s rubric

Evidence5 / 5

Definitive: phase 3 randomized evidence on hard endpoints, multi-lab replication, or community verification at scale.

32% of this desk’s rubric

Novelty1 / 5

A minor twist on a known approach.

8% of this desk’s rubric

Trajectory2 / 5

Some room to improve with obvious engineering.

5% of this desk’s rubric

Stakes3 / 5

Meaningful benefit to many people within a few years.

25% of this desk’s rubric

• Citations0 (reference 20, via openalex, Oct 20, 2026, 06:17 UTC)

• Reviewed by heuristic-v7 on Oct 20, 2026, 06:17 UTC. Paper type: clinical.
• Categories: Meta-Analysis, Comparative Study, Journal Article, Humans, Bone Neoplasms, Radiosurgery, Cancer Pain, Bone Metastases, Pain Response, Re-irradiation
• TOP, No.3 in the Medicine edition of October 20, 2026.