Stereotactic body radiation therapy and radiofrequency ablation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: not a rival but a partner for the cure.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kim N
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9577995 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Stereotactic body radiation therapy and radiofrequency ablation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: not a rival but a partner for the cure.
Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition 20221001 5
Similar Datasets
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.
| S-EPMC10135443 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose To assess the cost-effectiveness of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) versus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for patients with inoperable localized hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are eligible for both SBRT and RFA. Materials and Methods A decision-analytic Markov model was developed for patients with inoperable, localized HCC who were eligible for both RFA and SBRT to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the following treatment strategies: (a) SBRT as initial treatment followed by SBRT for local progression (SBRT-SBRT), (b) RFA followed by RFA for local progression (RFA-RFA), (c) SBRT followed by RFA for local progression (SBRT-RFA), and (d) RFA followed by SBRT for local progression (RFA-SBRT). Probabilities of disease progression, treatment characteristics, and mortality were derived from published studies. Outcomes included health benefits expressed as discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs in U.S. dollars, and cost-effectiveness expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the robustness of the findings. Results In the base case, SBRT-SBRT yielded the most QALYs (1.565) and cost $197 557. RFA-SBRT yielded 1.558 QALYs and cost $193 288. SBRT-SBRT was not cost-effective, at $558 679 per QALY gained relative to RFA-SBRT. RFA-SBRT was the preferred strategy, because RFA-RFA and SBRT-RFA were less effective and more costly. In all evaluated scenarios, SBRT was preferred as salvage therapy for local progression after RFA. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY gained, RFA-SBRT was preferred in 65.8% of simulations. Conclusion SBRT for initial treatment of localized, inoperable HCC is not cost-effective. However, SBRT is the preferred salvage therapy for local progression after RFA. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
| S-EPMC5410949 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6291538 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC7658324 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC5119964 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The integration of new technologies has raised an interest in liver tumor radiotherapy, with literature evolving to support its efficacy. These advances, particularly stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), have been critical in improving local control or potential cure in liver lesions not amenable to first-line surgical resection or radiofrequency ablation. Active investigation of SBRT, particularly for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), has recently started, yielding promising local control rates. In addition, data suggest a possibility that SBRT can be an alternative option for HCC unfit for other local therapies. However, information on optimal treatment indications, doses, and methods remains limited. In HCC, significant differences in patient characteristics and treatment availability exist by country. In addition, the prognosis of HCC is greatly influenced by underlying liver dysfunction and treatment itself in addition to tumor stage. Since they are closely linked to treatment approach, it is important to understand these differences in interpreting outcomes from various reports. Further studies are required to validate and maximize the efficacy of SBRT by a large, multi-institutional setting.
| S-EPMC3964382 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC9296936 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC6721575 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The role of external beam radiation therapy for primary liver malignancies has historically been limited due to the risk of radiation-induced liver disease. However, with the advent of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), we are able to dose escalate while safely sparing critical nearby structures. This review explores the evidence surrounding the use of SBRT for the treatment of primary liver malignancies. A review of the literature was performed. This article discusses the challenges, efficacy, and safety of SBRT for primary liver malignancies in order to conceptualize its role within a multidisciplinary framework. Prospective phase I and II trials show local control rates at 1 to 2 years ranging from 65% to 100%. Overall survival at 1 to 2 years ranged from 48% to 77%. Grade >3 toxicity ranged from 0% to 36%. Total radiotherapy doses ranged from 24 to 60 Gy delivered in 1 to 6 fractions. The SBRT offers a noninvasive therapy for patients with limited treatment options and should be considered in a multidisciplinary setting for the management of unresectable, locally advanced primary liver malignancies. Prospective randomized trials are warranted to determine the efficacy and safety of SBRT compared to and in combination with other treatment modalities.
| S-EPMC5937228 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC9262669 | biostudies-literature