No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

PurposeTo assess safety and outcome of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) as compared to systemic chemotherapy and partial hepatectomy (PH) in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).MethodsMEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched. Randomized trials and comparative observational studies with multivariate analysis and/or matching were included. Guidelines from National Guideline Clearinghouse and Guidelines International Network were assessed using the AGREE II instrument.ResultsThe search revealed 3530 records; 328 were selected for full-text review; 48 were included: 8 systematic reviews, 2 randomized studies, 26 comparative observational studies, 2 guideline-articles and 10 case series; in addition 13 guidelines were evaluated. Literature to assess the effectiveness of ablation was limited. RFA + systemic chemotherapy was superior to chemotherapy alone. PH was superior to RFA alone but not to RFA + PH or to MWA. Compared to PH, RFA showed fewer complications, MWA did not. Outcomes were subject to residual confounding since ablation was only employed for unresectable disease.ConclusionThe results from the EORTC-CLOCC trial, the comparable survival for ablation + PH versus PH alone, the potential to induce long-term disease control and the low complication rate argue in favour of ablation over chemotherapy alone. Further randomized comparisons of ablation to current-day chemotherapy alone should therefore be considered unethical. Hence, the highest achievable level of evidence for unresectable CRLM seems reached. The apparent selection bias from previous studies and the superior safety profile mandate the setup of randomized controlled trials comparing ablation to surgery.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00270-018-1959-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Purpose To (a) investigate the safety of percutaneous irreversible electroporation (IRE) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer and (b) evaluate the quality of life (QOL), pain perception, and efficacy in terms of time to local progression, event-free survival, and overall survival (OS). Materials and Methods The study was approved by the local review board (NL42888.029.13). All patients provided written informed consent for study participation, the ablation procedure, and data usage. Between January 2014 and June 2015, 25 patients with histologically proved locally advanced pancreatic cancer 5 cm or smaller (13 women, 12 men; median age, 61 years; age range, 41-78 years) were prospectively included to undergo percutaneous computed tomographic-guided IRE. Patients with a metallic biliary Wallstent, epilepsy, or ventricular arrhythmias were excluded. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to investigate time to local progression, event-free survival, and OS. Safety was assessed on the basis of adverse events, which were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Pain perception and QOL were evaluated by using specific questionnaires. Results All patients underwent IRE. The median largest tumor diameter was 4.0 cm (range, 3.3-5.0 cm). After a median follow-up of 12 months (interquartile range: 7-16 months), median event-free survival after IRE was 8 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4 months, 12 months); the median time to local progression after IRE was 12 months (95% CI: 8 months, 16 months). The median OS was 11 months from IRE (95% CI: 9 months, 13 months) and 17 months from diagnosis (95% CI: 10 months, 24 months). There were 12 minor complications (grade I or II) and 11 major complications (nine grade III, two grade IV) in 10 patients. There were no deaths within 90 days after IRE. Conclusion Percutaneous IRE for locally advanced pancreatic cancer is generally well tolerated, although major adverse events can occur. Preliminary survival data are encouraging and support the setup of larger phase II and III clinical trials to assess the efficacy of IRE plus chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant or second-line setting compared with more widely adopted regimens such as chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy. RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

BackgroundRadiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) are widely accepted techniques to eliminate small unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Although previous studies labelled thermal ablation inferior to surgical resection, the apparent selection bias when comparing patients with unresectable disease to surgical candidates, the superior safety profile, and the competitive overall survival results for the more recent reports mandate the setup of a randomized controlled trial. The objective of the COLLISION trial is to prove non-inferiority of thermal ablation compared to hepatic resection in patients with at least one resectable and ablatable CRLM and no extrahepatic disease.MethodsIn this two-arm, single-blind multi-center phase-III clinical trial, six hundred and eighteen patients with at least one CRLM (≤3 cm) will be included to undergo either surgical resection or thermal ablation of appointed target lesion(s) (≤3 cm). Primary endpoint is OS (overall survival, intention-to-treat analysis). Main secondary endpoints are overall disease-free survival (DFS), time to progression (TTP), time to local progression (TTLP), primary and assisted technique efficacy (PTE, ATE), procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay, assessment of pain and quality of life (QoL), cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY).DiscussionIf thermal ablation proves to be non-inferior in treating lesions ≤3 cm, a switch in treatment-method may lead to a reduction of the post-procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay and incremental costs without compromising oncological outcome for patients with CRLM.Trial registrationNCT03088150, January 11th 2017.

Background: Because sunitinib can induce extensive necrosis in metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC), we examined whether criteria defined by Choi might be valuable to predict early sunitinib efficacy. Methods: Computed tomography was used for measurement of tumour lesions in mm and lesion attenuation in Hounsfield units (HUs). According to Choi criteria partial response (PR) was defined as ⩾10% decrease in size or ⩾15% decrease in attenuation. Results: A total of 55 mRCC patients treated with sunitinib were included. At first evaluation, according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) 7 patients had PR, 38 stable disease (SD), and 10 progressive disease (PD), whereas according to Choi criteria 36 patients had PR, 6 SD and 13 PD. Median tumour attenuation decreased from 66 to 47 HUs ( P ⩽0.001). In patients with PR, Choi criteria had a significantly better predictive value for progression-free survival and overall survival (both P s<0.001) than RECIST ( P =0.685 and 0.191 respectively). The predictive value for RECIST increased ( P =0.001 and <0.001 respectively), when best response during treatment was taken into account. Conclusion: Choi criteria could be helpful to define early mRCC patients who benefit from sunitinib, but the use of these criteria will not change the management of these patients.