Dataset Information

Radiofrequency ablation versus stereotactic body radiotherapy for small hepatocellular carcinoma: a Markov model-based analysis.

ABSTRACT: The aim of this study is to compare radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) smaller than 3 cm. A Markov cohort model was developed to simulate a cohort of patients aged 60-65 years with small HCCs who had undergone either RFA or SBRT and were followed up over their remaining life expectancy. The inclusion criteria were: (1) HCC ≤3 cm in diameter with ≤ 3 nodules; (2) absence of extrahepatic metastasis or portal/hepatic vein invasion; (3) Child-Pugh Class A or B. Twenty thousand virtual patients were randomly assigned to undergo RFA or SBRT. Predicted life expectancy was 6.452 and 6.371 years in the RFA and SBRT groups, respectively. The probability distributions of the expected overall survival were nearly identical. The 95% confidence intervals were 6.25-6.66 and 6.17-6.58 years for RFA and SBRT, respectively. The difference between RFA and SBRT was insignificant (P = 0.2884). Two-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that if the tumor is 2-3 cm, SBRT is the preferred treatment option. Our Markov model has shown that expected overall survival of SBRT is nearly identical to RFA in HCCs smaller than 3 cm, but SBRT may have an advantage for tumors 2 cm and larger. A randomized trial is required to confirm these findings.

SUBMITTER: Seo YS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5119964 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Approximately 20% resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients are treated non-surgically due to various reasons. The aim of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with stage IA NSCLC who were ineligible for surgery using the surveillance, epidemiology and end-results (SEER) Database. Methods: Using the SEER registry, we identified a total of 6,195 IA NSCLC patients who received SBRT or RFA between 2004 and 2015 because of ineligibility for surgical resection due to various reasons. Complete clinical information was available in all these patients. Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were compared between RFA and SBRT groups by using propensity score matching (PSM), inverse probability of treatment weight (IPTW), and overlap weighting analysis. Additionally, an exploratory analysis was conducted to determine the effectiveness of RFA treatment based on the subsets of clinically relevant patients. Results: Of the 6,195 nonsurgical IA NSCLC patients, 191 patients (3.1%) received RFA and the other 6,004 patients (96.9%) received SBRT. The one-, three- and five-year OS in the unmatched RFA and SBRT groups were 83.3%, 48.5%and 29.1% vs. 83.8%, 48.3% and 27.4%, respectively, there was similar results in the PSM, IPTW, overlap weighing analysis. Nonsurgical IA NSCLC patients receiving RFA seemed to have better five-year survival than those receiving SBRT, though the difference was not statistically significant (OS, HR; 0.986; 95% CI, 0.827-1.175, P=0.8738; CSS, HR; 0.965; 95% CI, 0.765-1.219, P=0.7663). We found that the odds of receiving RFA decreased with larger tumor size (>2, <3 cm, OR; 0.303; 95% CI, 0.191-0.479; >3 cm, OR; 0.153; 95% CI, 0.093-0.251) compared with tumor size <1 cm. In subgroup analysis, patients receiving RFA seemed to have better OS than those receiving SBRT, though the difference was not statistically significant. This specific trend was even more obvious in patients with tumors <1cm in diameter (P=0.1577). Conclusion: In comparison with SBRT, RFA did not seem to adversely affect CSS and OS of IA NSCLC patients who were not suitable for surgical treatment. In addition, RFA seemed to offer better survival to IA NSCLC patients, especially those with tumors <1 cm.

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare patterns of care and overall survival (OS) between stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and percutaneous local tumor ablation (LTA) for non-surgically managed early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Materials and methodsThe National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried from 2004 to 2014 for adults with non-metastatic, node-negative invasive adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma of the lung with primary tumor size ≤5.0 cm who did not undergo surgery or chemotherapy and received SBRT or LTA. Patterns of care were assessed with multivariate logistic regression. After propensity-score weighting with generalized boosted regression, OS was assessed with univariate and doubly-robust multivariate Cox regression.ResultsOf 15,792 patients, 14,651 (93%) received SBRT and 1141 (7%) received LTA. Increasing age (OR 1.01, p = .035), treatment at an academic institution (OR 2.94, p < .001), increasing tumor size (OR 1.05, p < .001), and more recent year of diagnosis (OR 1.43, p < .001) were predictive of treatment with SBRT, whereas comorbidities (OR 0.74, p = .003) and treatment at a high-volume facility (OR 0.05, p < .001) were predictive for LTA. At a median follow-up of 26.2 months, SBRT was associated with improved OS relative to LTA within a propensity-score weighted doubly-robust multivariate analysis (HR 0.71, p < .001). On weighted subgroup analyses, improved OS was observed with SBRT for tumor sizes >2.0 cm (HR 0.72, p < .001) and for those treated at high-volume facilities (HR 0.71, p < .001). No OS difference was found with SBRT or LTA in tumor sizes ≤2.0 cm (HR 0.90, p = .227).ConclusionWithin the NCDB, SBRT was more commonly utilized and was associated with improved OS when compared to percutaneous LTA for patients with non-surgically managed early-stage NSCLC. Patients with small tumor volumes likely represent an appropriate population for future prospective randomized comparisons between SBRT and LTA.

Dataset Information

Radiofrequency ablation versus stereotactic body radiotherapy for small hepatocellular carcinoma: a Markov model-based analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets