Project description: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.
Project description:Surgical intervention is the first-line treatment in well-selected hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. However, only a few patients are suitable to receive radical surgery. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate local control among four local ablative therapies in inoperable HCC patients, including radiofrequency ablation therapy (RFA), microwave ablation therapy (MWA), stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), and particle radiotherapy. The primary outcome was the local control rate and the secondary were regional and distant progression rates, overall survival rate, and adverse events. We included twenty-six studies from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. MWA (p < 0.001) and particle radiotherapy (p < 0.001) showed better performance of local control compared to RFA, while SABR (p = 0.276) showed a non-significant trend. However, SABR (p = 0.002) and particle radiotherapy (p < 0.001) showed better performance than RFA in HCCs of ≥ 30 mm in size. MWA showed a similar result to RFA while SABR and particle radiotherapy showed a lower survival rate in the 2-, 3-, and 4-year overall survival rates. Our results indicate that MWA, SABR and particle radiotherapy were safe and no inferior to RFA in local control rate. Besides, the local control rates of SABR and particle radiotherapy are better than RFA in HCC of ≥ 30 mm in size. As a result, we suggested that MWA, SABR and particle radiotherapy to be effective alternatives to RFA for inoperable HCC. Moreover, the tumor size should be taken into consideration for optimal treatment selection between local ablative therapies.
Project description:Aim: The aim of this meta-regression was to assess the impact of mean/median age, mean/median tumor size, percentage of males in total sample, and total sample size on the comparative effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Methods: Ten studies reporting on the composite outcome of overall survival and local control were included. Results: A significant relationship was found between age and overall survival at 1 and 2 for both RFA and SBRT. A significant relationship was noted also between age and local control at 1 and 2 years for RFA. Conclusion: Patients treated with SBRT had a wider range of tumor sizes and larger tumor sizes; no relationship was observed between tumor size and overall survival or local control by SBRT.
Project description:Background: Both stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are effective local treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but whether RFA is superior to SBRT is still controversial. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to compare the treatment outcomes of SBRT with RFA as curable or bridge intention. Methods: We searched online databases for studies that compared treatment outcomes for SBRT and RFA. Eligibility criteria included evaluation of local control, overall survival (OS), transplant rate, and post-transplant pathological necrosis. Results: As no randomized clinical trials met the criteria, 10 retrospective studies with a total of 2,732 patients were included. Two studies were in favor of SBRT in local control, two studies preferred RFA in OS, and others reported comparable outcomes for both. SBRT demonstrated significantly higher 1- and 3-year local control than RFA [odds ratio (OR) 0.42, 95% CI 0.24-0.74, P = 0.003; and OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.80, P = 0.002, respectively]. However, SBRT reported significantly shorter 1- and 2-year OS (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.21-1.90, P = 0.0003; and OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.38-2.01, P < 0.00001, respectively). As bridge treatment, no significant difference was shown in transplant rate and post-transplant pathological necrosis rate (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.32-1.03, P = 0.060; and OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.13-1.82, P = 0.290, respectively). Conclusions: This study demonstrates SBRT is able to complete a better local control for HCC than RFA, though the OS is inferior to RFA because of tumor burden or liver profiles of the enrolled studies. Well-designed, randomized, multicenter trials will be required to further investigate the conclusion.
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.
Project description:Background & aimsRadiation therapy has been refined with increasing evidence of the benefits of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether SBRT could serve as an alternative to radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for small HCC with a single lesion ≤5.0 cm.MethodsPatients with a single HCC lesion ≤5.0 cm who received RFA or SBRT were included. Cumulative local/distant recurrence rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, adverse events and subsequent treatments after recurrence were analyzed.ResultsA total of 288 patients receiving RFA (n = 166) or SBRT (n = 122) were enrolled. The baseline characteristics between the two groups were comparable. The cumulative local recurrence rate in the SBRT group was significantly lower than that in the RFA group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.30, 95% CI 0.16-0.57, p <0.001), especially for patients with tumours >2.0 cm (HR 0.20, 95% CI 0.08-0.50, p <0.001) or adjacent to major vessels (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.13-0.66, p <0.001). Cumulative distant recurrence rate, progression-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different between the two groups (all p >0.050). Adverse events were mild and easily reversible. However, more patients in the SBRT group suffered from Child-Pugh score and total bilirubin increases. More treatment options after recurrence or progression might be available for patients in the RFA group compared to those in the SBRT group (p <0.001).ConclusionsBoth RFA and SBRT were effective and safe for HCC with a single lesion ≤5.0 cm. SBRT could be an alternative treatment to RFA, especially for tumours >2.0 cm or adjacent to major vessels.Impact and implicationsStereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) may be used as an alternative treatment to thermal ablation for patients with BCLC stage A hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are not candidates for surgical resection, including those with tumours >3 cm and those with 1 to 3 tumours. This study focused on HCC patients with a specific tumour burden, namely a single lesion ≤5.0 cm, demonstrating that SBRT could be an effective and safe alternative to radiofrequency ablation (RFA), especially for those with tumours >2.0 cm or adjacent to major vessels. The findings of this study provided robust empirical evidence supporting the utilization of SBRT in treating small HCC, while also establishing a solid foundation for future prospective clinical investigations.
Project description:(1) Background: To investigate the clinical outcomes between radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for residual hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC). (2) Methods: 139 patients were diagnosed with the RHCC after post-operative checkup, among whom 39 and 33 patients underwent RFA or SBRT as salvage treatments, respectively. We applied the propensity score matching (PSM) to adjust for imbalances in treatment assignment. Local disease progression, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and treatment-related side effects were the study endpoints. (3) Results: Before PSM, the SBRT group demonstrated significantly lower local disease progression rate (6/33 vs. 23/39; p = 0.002), better PFS (the 1- and 3-year PFS were 63.3% and 49.3% vs. 41.5% and 22.3%, respectively, p = 0.036), and comparable OS (the 1- and 3-year OS were 85.4% and 71.1% vs. 97.3% and 57.6%, respectively, p = 0.680). After PSM of 23 matched cases, the SBRT group demonstrated significantly lower local disease progression rate, better PFS and comparable OS. Centrally located tumor predicted the worse OS. No acute grade 3+ toxicity was observed in both groups. (4) Conclusion: SBRT might be the preferred treatment for RHCC, especially for patients with larger tumors or tumors abutting major vessels, rather than repeated RFA.
Project description:PurposeRadiofrequency ablation is a curative treatment option for very early-stage or earlystage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (PRFA) for subphrenic tumors is technically challenging. Laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) has been used to overcome this disadvantage. This study compared the treatment outcomes between LRFA and PRFA for subphrenic HCC.MethodsThis retrospective study screened patients who underwent PRFA or LRFA for subphrenic HCC between 2013 and 2018. Therapeutic outcomes, including local tumor progression (LTP), intrahepatic distant recurrence (IDR), extrahepatic metastasis (EM), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS), were compared between the two groups.ResultsThirty patients in the PRFA group and 23 patients in the LRFA group were included. LTP was observed in six patients in the PRFA group (20%), but in no patients in the LRFA group. The cumulative LTP rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 3.7%, 23.4%, and 23.4%, respectively, in the PRFA group and 0.0% in the LRFA group (P=0.015). The IDR, EM, and DFS rates were not significantly different between the two groups (P=0.304, P=0.175, and P=0.075, respectively). The OS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 96.6%, 85.7%, and 71.6%, respectively, in the PRFA group and 100%, 95.7%, and 95.7%, respectively, in the LRFA group (P=0.049).ConclusionLRFA demonstrated better therapeutic outcomes than did PRFA for subphrenic tumors in terms of LTP and OS. Therefore, LRFA can be considered as the first-line treatment option for subphrenic HCC.
Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to compare the treatment outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) and to determine the favorable treatment modality according to tumor characteristics.Materials and methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the records of 222 colorectal cancer patients with 330 CRLM who underwent RFA (268 tumors in 178 patients) or SBRT (62 tumors in 44 patients) between 2007 and 2014. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox models were used by adjusting with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW).ResultsThe median follow-up duration was 30.5 months. The median tumor size was significantly smaller in the RFA group than in the SBRT group (1.5 cm vs 2.3 cm, p<0.001). In IPTW-adjusted analysis, difference in treatment modality was not associated with significant differences in 1-year and 3-year recurrence-free survival (35% vs 43%, 22% vs 23%; p=0.198), overall survival (96% vs 91%, 58% vs 56%; p=0.508), and freedom from local progression (FFLP; 90% vs 72%, 78% vs 60%; p=0.106). Significant interaction effect between the treatment modality and tumor size was observed for FFLP (p=0.001). In IPTW-adjusted subgroup analysis of patients with tumor size >2 cm, the SBRT group had a higher FFLP compared with the RFA group (HR, 0.153; p<0.001).ConclusionSBRT and RFA showed similar local control in the treatment of patients with CRLM. Tumor size was an independent prognostic factor for local control and SBRT may be preferred for larger tumors.