Cargando…

Efficacy of Thermal Ablation for Small-Size (0–3 cm) versus Intermediate-Size (3–5 cm) Colorectal Liver Metastases: Results from the Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE)

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Thermal ablation is widely recognized as the standard of care for small-size (≤3 cm) colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) that are difficult to resect. The purpose of this comparative series was to analyze outcomes for intermediate-size (3.1–5 cm) versus small-size CRLM. In total, 280...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dijkstra, Madelon, van der Lei, Susan, Puijk, Robbert S., Schulz, Hannah H., Vos, Danielle J. W., Timmer, Florentine E. F., Scheffer, Hester J., Buffart, Tineke E., van den Tol, M. Petrousjka, Lissenberg-Witte, Birgit I., Swijnenburg, Rutger-Jan, Versteeg, Kathelijn S., Meijerink, Martijn R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10487073/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37686622
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers15174346
_version_ 1785103150179418112
author Dijkstra, Madelon
van der Lei, Susan
Puijk, Robbert S.
Schulz, Hannah H.
Vos, Danielle J. W.
Timmer, Florentine E. F.
Scheffer, Hester J.
Buffart, Tineke E.
van den Tol, M. Petrousjka
Lissenberg-Witte, Birgit I.
Swijnenburg, Rutger-Jan
Versteeg, Kathelijn S.
Meijerink, Martijn R.
author_facet Dijkstra, Madelon
van der Lei, Susan
Puijk, Robbert S.
Schulz, Hannah H.
Vos, Danielle J. W.
Timmer, Florentine E. F.
Scheffer, Hester J.
Buffart, Tineke E.
van den Tol, M. Petrousjka
Lissenberg-Witte, Birgit I.
Swijnenburg, Rutger-Jan
Versteeg, Kathelijn S.
Meijerink, Martijn R.
author_sort Dijkstra, Madelon
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: Thermal ablation is widely recognized as the standard of care for small-size (≤3 cm) colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) that are difficult to resect. The purpose of this comparative series was to analyze outcomes for intermediate-size (3.1–5 cm) versus small-size CRLM. In total, 280 patients undergoing 347 procedures between December 2000 and November 2021 were included. No significant difference between patients with small- versus intermediate-size CRLM was found in a comparison of overall survival. Per-tumor analysis showed that local control (LC) was superior in the small-size group. Nevertheless, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year LC for intermediate-size CRLM was still 93.9%, 85.4%, and 81.5%, and technical efficacy improved over time. In conclusion, thermal ablation for intermediate-size unresectable CRLM is safe and induces long-term local control in the vast majority of tumors. ABSTRACT: Purpose: Thermal ablation is widely recognized as the standard of care for small-size unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). For larger CRLM safety, local control and overall efficacy are not well established and insufficiently validated. The purpose of this comparative series was to analyze outcomes for intermediate-size versus small-size CRLM. Material and methods: Patients treated with thermal ablation between December 2000 and November 2021 for small-size and intermediate-size CRLM were included. The primary endpoints were complication rate and local control (LC). Secondary endpoints included local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: In total, 59 patients were included in the intermediate-size (3–5 cm) group and 221 in the small-size (0–3 cm) group. Complications were not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.546). No significant difference between the groups was found in an overall comparison of OS (HR 1.339; 95% CI 0.824–2.176; p = 0.239). LTPFS (HR 3.388; p < 0.001) and LC (HR 3.744; p = 0.004) were superior in the small-size group. Nevertheless, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year LC for intermediate-size CRLM was still 93.9%, 85.4%, and 81.5%, and technical efficacy improved over time. Conclusions: Thermal ablation for intermediate-size unresectable CRLM is safe and induces long-term LC in the vast majority. The results of the COLLISION-XL trial (unresectable colorectal liver metastases: stereotactic body radiotherapy versus microwave ablation—a phase II randomized controlled trial for CRLM 3–5 cm) are required to provide further clarification of the role of local ablative methods for intermediate-size unresectable CRLM.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10487073
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104870732023-09-09 Efficacy of Thermal Ablation for Small-Size (0–3 cm) versus Intermediate-Size (3–5 cm) Colorectal Liver Metastases: Results from the Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE) Dijkstra, Madelon van der Lei, Susan Puijk, Robbert S. Schulz, Hannah H. Vos, Danielle J. W. Timmer, Florentine E. F. Scheffer, Hester J. Buffart, Tineke E. van den Tol, M. Petrousjka Lissenberg-Witte, Birgit I. Swijnenburg, Rutger-Jan Versteeg, Kathelijn S. Meijerink, Martijn R. Cancers (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: Thermal ablation is widely recognized as the standard of care for small-size (≤3 cm) colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) that are difficult to resect. The purpose of this comparative series was to analyze outcomes for intermediate-size (3.1–5 cm) versus small-size CRLM. In total, 280 patients undergoing 347 procedures between December 2000 and November 2021 were included. No significant difference between patients with small- versus intermediate-size CRLM was found in a comparison of overall survival. Per-tumor analysis showed that local control (LC) was superior in the small-size group. Nevertheless, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year LC for intermediate-size CRLM was still 93.9%, 85.4%, and 81.5%, and technical efficacy improved over time. In conclusion, thermal ablation for intermediate-size unresectable CRLM is safe and induces long-term local control in the vast majority of tumors. ABSTRACT: Purpose: Thermal ablation is widely recognized as the standard of care for small-size unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). For larger CRLM safety, local control and overall efficacy are not well established and insufficiently validated. The purpose of this comparative series was to analyze outcomes for intermediate-size versus small-size CRLM. Material and methods: Patients treated with thermal ablation between December 2000 and November 2021 for small-size and intermediate-size CRLM were included. The primary endpoints were complication rate and local control (LC). Secondary endpoints included local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: In total, 59 patients were included in the intermediate-size (3–5 cm) group and 221 in the small-size (0–3 cm) group. Complications were not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.546). No significant difference between the groups was found in an overall comparison of OS (HR 1.339; 95% CI 0.824–2.176; p = 0.239). LTPFS (HR 3.388; p < 0.001) and LC (HR 3.744; p = 0.004) were superior in the small-size group. Nevertheless, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year LC for intermediate-size CRLM was still 93.9%, 85.4%, and 81.5%, and technical efficacy improved over time. Conclusions: Thermal ablation for intermediate-size unresectable CRLM is safe and induces long-term LC in the vast majority. The results of the COLLISION-XL trial (unresectable colorectal liver metastases: stereotactic body radiotherapy versus microwave ablation—a phase II randomized controlled trial for CRLM 3–5 cm) are required to provide further clarification of the role of local ablative methods for intermediate-size unresectable CRLM. MDPI 2023-08-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10487073/ /pubmed/37686622 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers15174346 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Dijkstra, Madelon
van der Lei, Susan
Puijk, Robbert S.
Schulz, Hannah H.
Vos, Danielle J. W.
Timmer, Florentine E. F.
Scheffer, Hester J.
Buffart, Tineke E.
van den Tol, M. Petrousjka
Lissenberg-Witte, Birgit I.
Swijnenburg, Rutger-Jan
Versteeg, Kathelijn S.
Meijerink, Martijn R.
Efficacy of Thermal Ablation for Small-Size (0–3 cm) versus Intermediate-Size (3–5 cm) Colorectal Liver Metastases: Results from the Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE)
title Efficacy of Thermal Ablation for Small-Size (0–3 cm) versus Intermediate-Size (3–5 cm) Colorectal Liver Metastases: Results from the Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE)
title_full Efficacy of Thermal Ablation for Small-Size (0–3 cm) versus Intermediate-Size (3–5 cm) Colorectal Liver Metastases: Results from the Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE)
title_fullStr Efficacy of Thermal Ablation for Small-Size (0–3 cm) versus Intermediate-Size (3–5 cm) Colorectal Liver Metastases: Results from the Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE)
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of Thermal Ablation for Small-Size (0–3 cm) versus Intermediate-Size (3–5 cm) Colorectal Liver Metastases: Results from the Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE)
title_short Efficacy of Thermal Ablation for Small-Size (0–3 cm) versus Intermediate-Size (3–5 cm) Colorectal Liver Metastases: Results from the Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE)
title_sort efficacy of thermal ablation for small-size (0–3 cm) versus intermediate-size (3–5 cm) colorectal liver metastases: results from the amsterdam colorectal liver met registry (amcore)
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10487073/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37686622
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers15174346
work_keys_str_mv AT dijkstramadelon efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT vanderleisusan efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT puijkrobberts efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT schulzhannahh efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT vosdaniellejw efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT timmerflorentineef efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT schefferhesterj efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT buffarttinekee efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT vandentolmpetrousjka efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT lissenbergwittebirgiti efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT swijnenburgrutgerjan efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT versteegkathelijns efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore
AT meijerinkmartijnr efficacyofthermalablationforsmallsize03cmversusintermediatesize35cmcolorectallivermetastasesresultsfromtheamsterdamcolorectallivermetregistryamcore