RFA, SBRT Both Good Options for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Article

Both radiofrequency ablation and stereotactic body radiotherapy are effective in the treatment of inoperable, non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma.

Both radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) are effective in the treatment of inoperable, non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), according to a new retrospective trial.

“SBRT is an emerging non-invasive alternative to RFA, with similar local control rates,” wrote study authors led by Mary Feng, MD, of the University of Michigan Medical Center in Ann Arbor. “Although patients with localized HCC who do not undergo surgery are typically candidates for both SBRT and RFA, there are no data comparing these modalities.”

The trial retrospectively examined outcomes of 161 non-metastatic HCC patients undergoing RFA (249 total tumors treated) and 63 patients undergoing SBRT (83 tumors treated). There were several baseline differences between the groups, including lower Child-Pugh scores (P = .003) in the SBRT group and higher alpha-fetoprotein levels in the SBRT patients. The results of the trial were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

The 1-year freedom from local progression (FFLP) was 83.6% with RFA and 97.4% with SBRT. At 2 years, these rates were 80.2% and 83.8%, respectively. On univariate analysis treatment with RFA was associated with local progression, with a hazard ratio (HR) for RFA vs SBRT of 2.63 (P = .016). This held true on a multivariate analysis as well, with an HR of 3.84 (P = .002). Increasing tumor size predicted failure with RFA, but not with SBRT.

The overall survival (OS) rates were not significantly different between groups. At 1 year, the OS was 69.6% with RFA and 74.1% with SBRT; at 2 years, the rates were 52.9% and 46.3%, respectively.

There were 18 grade 3 or higher adverse events in the RFA group, representing 11% of total treatments. In the SBRT group, there were 3 such adverse events, representing 5% of treatments. There were two treatment-related deaths in the RFA group, one from hemothorax and one from gastrointestinal bleeding; there were no deaths as a consequence of SBRT.

Though the study showed better FFLP with SBRT than with RFA, the authors wrote that, “It would be incorrect to suggest that all unresectable HCCs be treated with SBRT. RFA provides excellent local control for tumors smaller than 2 cm but has difficulty controlling lesions larger than 3 cm.”

They emphasized the need for a randomized trial comparing SBRT to percutaneous ablation.

Recent Videos
Combining sotorasib with panitumumab may reduce the burden of disease in patients with KRAS G12C-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer.
Findings from the CodeBreak 300 study have cemented sotorasib/panitumumab as a third-line treatment option for KRAS G12C-mutated colorectal cancer.
Sotorasib plus panitumumab may offer improved survival compared with previously approved treatment options in KRAS G12C-mutated colorectal cancer.
Additional local, regional, or national policy may bolster access to screening for colorectal cancer, according to Aasma Shaukat, MD, MPH.
The mechanism of action for daraxonrasib inhibits effectors and signaling while forming a relatively unstable tri-complex with codon 12 mutations.
Almost all patients evaluable for efficacy reported a decrease in ctDNA when treated with daraxonrasib for RAS-mutant pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
Additional progression-free survival data from the phase 3 BREAKWATER trial will be presented at future meetings.
As patients are nearing the end of life, different management strategies, such as opioids, may be needed to help mitigate pain or fatigue.
Kelley A. Rone, DNP, RN, AGNP-c, highlights the importance of having end-of-life discussions early in a patient’s cancer treatment course.
Immunotherapy may be an “elegant” method of managing colorectal cancer, says Gregory Charak, MD.