Cost and Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Limited Surgical Resection for Stage I Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer in Elderly Patients: Is Less More?

Alexander, Erica S.; Machan, Jason T.; Ng, Tony; Breen, Lucas; DiPetrillo, Thomas A.; Dupuy, Damian E.

doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2012.12.016

Cited by 38 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The difference in cumulative costs echoes the findings of Alexander et al (17), who recently reported a significant decrease in costs among a similar cohort of patients undergoing ablation compared with sublobar resection, with monthly posttreatment cost differing between the two groups by a factor of 1.93. In the present study, cumulative costs at 1 month after treatment differed by a factor of 1.89 in favor of ablation.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

An Economic Analysis of Sublobar Resection versus Thermal Ablation for Early-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Kwan

Mortell

Hippe

et al. 2014

Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

An Economic Analysis of Sublobar Resection versus Thermal Ablation for Early-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Kwan

Mortell

Hippe

et al. 2014

Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This is probably because the patients who underwent RFA were older and tended to have substantial comorbidities, so they tended to die due to causes other than cancer recurrence. In contrast with the previously discussed studies, Alexander et al [41] reported that 28 patients with stage I NSCLC treated with sublobar resection had significantly longer overall and cancer-specific survival and a lower risk of recurrence compared to 56 patients treated with RFA. It should be noted that this result was biased by the fact that the RFA group was significantly older than the surgical group.…”

Section: Comparison Of Rfa and Other Local Therapiesmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…RFA may be suitable for patients with early-stage NSCLC and NSCLC recurrence after therapy, even if they are unsuitable for conventional therapies. It has some notable advantages: it is minimally invasive (can be performed percutaneously under local anesthesia), costs less than surgery [41], has an insignificant impact on pulmonary function [15, 16, 18, 20], may be applied regardless of any previous treatments, and may be repeated whenever necessary.…”

Section: Role Of Rfa In the Treatment Of Early-stage Nsclcmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiofrequency Ablation for Early-Stage Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer

Hiraki

Gobara

Iguchi

et al. 2014

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review examines studies of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and discusses the role of RFA in treatment of early-stage NSCLC. RFA is usually performed under local anesthesia with computed tomography guidance. RFA-associated mortality, while being rare, can result from pulmonary events. RFA causes pneumothorax in up to 63% of cases, although pneumothorax requiring chest drainage occurs in less than 15% of procedures. Other severe complications are rare. After RFA of stage I NSCLC, 31–42% of patients show local progression. The 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates after RFA of stage I NSCLC were 78% to 100%, 53% to 86%, 36% to 88%, and 25% to 61%, respectively. The median survival time ranged from 29 to 67 months. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year cancer-specific survival rates after RFA of stage I NSCLC were 89% to 100%, 92% to 93%, and 59% to 88%, respectively. RFA has a higher local failure rate than sublobar resection and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Therefore, RFA may currently be reserved for early-stage NSCLC patients who are unfit for sublobar resection or SBRT. Various technologies are being developed to improve clinical outcomes of RFA for early-stage NSCLC.

show abstract

“…Although in this study patients treated surgically survived longer, the patients who received RFA treatment were significantly older [26].…”

Section: Lungmentioning

confidence: 60%

Advances in Interventional Oncology: Percutaneous Therapies

Muallem

Solomon

2014

Curr Radiol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The field of interventional oncology has emerged over the last decade to focus on the minimally invasive image-guided techniques for the treatment of cancer. Ablative techniques specifically have evolved in more recent years and garnered significant evidence supporting their increased inclusion in standards of care and their novel use as curative or disease-modifying therapies, while still maintaining a large role in supportive or symptomatic treatment. Percutaneous ablation will more than likely continue to evolve because of the parallel innovations in imaging and engineered medical devices used in percutaneous interventions but also the improved understanding of cancer behavior and development of personalized cancer therapy.

show abstract

Cost and Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Limited Surgical Resection for Stage I Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer in Elderly Patients: Is Less More?

Cited by 38 publications

References 23 publications

An Economic Analysis of Sublobar Resection versus Thermal Ablation for Early-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

An Economic Analysis of Sublobar Resection versus Thermal Ablation for Early-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Radiofrequency Ablation for Early-Stage Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer

Advances in Interventional Oncology: Percutaneous Therapies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About