Comparison of Cooled-Probe Microwave and Radiofrequency Ablation Treatment in Incipient Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Phase Iii Randomized Controlled Trial with 6-Year Follow-Up
Jie Yu,Ping Liang,Xiao-ling Yu,Zhi-gang Cheng,Zhi-yu Han,Fang-yi Liu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2016.34.15_suppl.4068
IF: 45.3
2016-01-01
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Abstract:4068 Background: According to randomized controlled trial (RCT) requirement, the therapeutic effectiveness of cooled-probe microwave ablation (MWA) versus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) on early-stage < 5cm hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was investigated to find a better approach for minimally invasive thermal ablation. Methods: From October 2008 to June 2015, 403 cases of biopsy-proved HCC patients were involved in a RCT study, 203 (265 nodules) cases were treated with ultrasound guided percutaneously MWA and 200 (251 nodules) cases were treated with RFA. The patients were then followed up with contrast enhanced imaging including contrast enhanced ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography to evaluate treatment response prospectively, including technique effectiveness (TE), local tumor progression (LTP), intrahepatic metastases, extrahepatic metastases, complications, disease free survival(DFS) and overall survival(OS). Survival was analysed using the Kaplan–Meier method. The study has been registered in Clinical-Trials.gov and the identifier number is NCT02539212. Results: The follow-up period was 35.2 (range 2.0-81.9) months. MWA needed less applicator number, ablation session, puncture number, ablation duration and expense (P< 0.05). The TE rates were 99.6% (264/265) in MWA and 98.8% (248/251) in RFA. The 1-, 3-, 5-year LTP were 1.1%, 4.3%, 11.4% for MWA versus 2.1%, 5.8%, 19.7% for RFA, respectively(P= 0.11). The 1-, 3-, 5-year OS were 96.4%, 81.9% and 67.3% for MWA and 95.9%, 81.4% and 72.7% for RFA, respectively (P = 0.91). There was no difference in 5-year intrahepatic metastatic (P= 0.30) and extrahepatic metastatic rates(P= 0.12) between two groups. There was also no difference in major complications between MWA(3.4%) and RFA (2.5%) (P= 0.59). Conclusions: Both MWA and RFA are suitable options for early-stage HCC. MWA shared the advantages of less ablation duration, puncture, session and expense. Therefore, MWA seems a safe and promising treatment of HCC. Clinical trial information: NCT02539212.