Clinical assessment of computed tomography guided radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of inoperable patients with pulmonary tumors

Thermal ablation for primary and metastatic lung tumors: Single-center analysis of peri-procedural and intermediate-term clinical outcomes

PURPOSE

To evaluate the peri-procedural and intermediate-term clinical outcomes of thermal ablation of primary and metastatic lung cancer through analysis of a 5-year institutional experience.

METHODS

In this retrospective, IRB-approved study, 55 consecutive lung ablation interventions (33 cryoablation and 22 microwave ablations) performed at an academic medical center from 2017 to 2022 were evaluated. Cryoablation was performed utilizing multiple 14-guage probes using a triple freeze/thaw protocol. Microwave ablation required a single 14-guage probe, set to 60-80 watts for 5-10 min. Lung disease distribution was 58.2 % bilateral with largest lesion size of 5.5 cm. Periprocedural outcomes including technical success and complications as well as long-term outcomes including radiographic response, objective response ratio (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and functional status were elucidated.

RESULTS

Technical success rate was 100 %. The most common complication was pneumothorax which occurred in 36 (65.5 %) patients, with 27 (49.1 %) requiring chest tube placement. At 6 months, 52 (98.2 %) of the patients demonstrated a complete response and 1 patient exhibited a partial response, yielding an ORR and a DCR of 100 %. The PFS was 26 ± 19 months, and the OS was 90.9 %, 83.6 %, and 74.5 % at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Additionally, 92.7 % (51) of patients maintained or improved their functional status (ECOG) at 6 months.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous thermal ablation techniques are evolving and promising treatments for both primary and metastatic lung tumors. Our 5-year institutional experience demonstrated their safety and efficacy with preservation of functional performance.

A guide for managing patients with stage I NSCLC: deciding between lobectomy, segmentectomy, wedge, SBRT and ablation-part 4: systematic review of evidence involving SBRT and ablation

Background

Clinical decision-making for patients with stage I lung cancer is complex. It involves multiple options [lobectomy, segmentectomy, wedge, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), thermal ablation], weighing multiple outcomes (e.g., short-, intermediate-, long-term) and multiple aspects of each (e.g., magnitude of a difference, the degree of confidence in the evidence, and the applicability to the patient and setting at hand). A structure is needed to summarize the relevant evidence for an individual patient and to identify which outcomes have the greatest impact on the decision-making.

Methods

A PubMed systematic review from 2000-2021 of outcomes after SBRT or thermal ablation vs. resection is the focus of this paper. Evidence was abstracted from randomized trials and non-randomized comparisons with at least some adjustment for confounders. The analysis involved careful assessment, including characteristics of patients, settings, residual confounding etc. to expose degrees of uncertainty and applicability to individual patients. Evidence is summarized that provides an at-a-glance overall impression as well as the ability to delve into layers of details of the patients, settings and treatments involved.

Results

Short-term outcomes are meaningfully better after SBRT than resection. SBRT doesn't affect quality-of-life (QOL), on average pulmonary function is not altered, but a minority of patients may experience gradual late toxicity. Adjusted non-randomized comparisons demonstrate a clinically relevant detriment in long-term outcomes after SBRT vs. surgery. The short-term benefits of SBRT over surgery are accentuated with increasing age and compromised patients, but the long-term detriment remains. Ablation is associated with a higher rate of complications than SBRT, but there is little intermediate-term impact on quality-of-life or pulmonary function tests. Adjusted comparisons show a meaningful detriment in long-term outcomes after ablation vs. surgery; there is less difference between ablation and SBRT.

Conclusions

A systematic, comprehensive summary of evidence regarding Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy or thermal ablation vs. resection with attention to aspects of applicability, uncertainty and effect modifiers provides a foundation for a framework for individualized decision-making.

Ablation Therapy Combined with EGFR TKIs in the Treatment of Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

Systematically evaluate the efficacy of physical ablation combined with TKI in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

We performed a comprehensive search of databases including OVID, PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and three Chinese databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, and Chongqing Weipu Database). The aim was to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) investigating physical ablation as the treatment for advanced NSCLC. We also evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies and summarized the data extracted for meta-analysis with Review Manager 5.3.

Results

A total of 9 studies, including 752 patients, were evaluable. The meta-analysis results show that the complete response rate (CRR) (RR: 2.23, 95% CI: 1. 46 to 3.40, P 0.01), partial response rate (PRR) (RR: −2.25, 95% CI: 1.41 to 3.59, P 0.01), and disease control rate (DCR) (RR: −2.80, 95% CI: 1.64 to 4.80, P< 0.01) of patients with advanced NSCLC who received physical ablation combined with TKI therapy were higher than those who did not receive physical ablation therapy. The control groups from seven of the studies had a total of 606 patients with targeted therapies and chemotherapy. The complete response rate was (CRR) (RR: 2.48, 2.4895% CI: 1.55 to 2.47, P 0.01), partial response rate (PRR) (RR: −1.66, 95% CI: 1.20 to 2.31, P< 0.01), and disease control rate (DCR) (RR: −2.68, 95% CI: 1.41 to 5.06, P< 0.01) for patients with advanced NSCLC who had received physical ablation combined with targeted therapies and chemotherapy, compared to patients who had not received physical ablation therapy. This difference was statistically significant. Above all, these results showed that the clinical efficacy of physical ablation combined EGFR-TKIs therapy (regardless of whether it was combined with chemotherapy) was better than that of EGFR-TKIs therapy alone.

Conclusion

Physical ablation combined with TKI treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC can improve efficacy.

Clinical assessment of magnetic resonance imaging-guided radiofrequency ablation for breast cancer

The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for breast cancer patients who cannot undergo traditional surgery. A total of 10 patients were treated by MRI-guided RFA, of whom 6 had stage IV disease (lung metastasis n=3, bone metastasis n=1, liver metastasis n=1 and mediastinal metastasis n=1) and the remaining 4 patients, who refused surgery, had stage III disease accompanied by severe underlying conditions. The changes in feasibility, tumor volume, bleeding, local recurrence, metastasis and complications were evaluated after RFA. The patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months, and annually thereafter. A total of 14 RFA sessions were successfully performed (100%) in the 10 patients, among whom 7 patients underwent a single RFA session, 2 patients underwent two sessions, and 1 patient underwent three sessions. Compared with pre-RFA, the volume of the tumors at 6 months after RFA was markedly decreased. There was no local tumor recurrence or metastasis detected during a mean follow-up period of 19.5±3.46 months, and no major complications were reported. Therefore, RFA was found to be a minimally invasive and feasible treatment method in the present study, and MRI-guided RFA may be a promising alternative option for breast cancer patients who are unable to tolerate surgery. However, more prospective studies on the applicability of RFA in breast cancer are required.