Radiofrequency ablation <i>versus</i> stereotactic body radiation therapy for small (≤ 3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma: A retrospective comparison analysis
Yuri Jeong, Kyung Jin Lee, So Jung Lee, Yong Moon Shin, Minju Kim, Young‐Suk Lim, Han Chu Lee, Jinhong Jung, Jin‐hong Park, Jong Hoon Kim, So Yeon Kim, Sang Min Yoon
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: We compared the clinical outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in small (≤ 3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: A total of 266 patients treated with RFA (n = 179) or SBRT (n = 87) were reviewed. Local control rates (LCRs), intrahepatic recurrence-free survival (IHRFS) rates, and overall survival (OS) rates were compared. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for imbalances in baseline characteristics between the two groups. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 50.3 months, and treatment method (RFA vs SBRT) was not a significant prognostic factor for LCR, OS, and IHRFS in both multivariate and IPTW-adjusted analyses. The 4-year LCRs after RFA and SBRT were 92.7% and 95.0%, respectively. Perivascular location was a significant prognostic factor for LCR in the entire patients and in the RFA group, but not in the SBRT group. The 4-year OS rates in the RFA and SBRT groups were 78.1% and 64.1%, respectively (P = 0.012). After IPTW adjustment, the 4-year LCRs (90.6% vs 96.3%) and OS rates (71.8% vs 70.2%) were not significantly different between the two groups. The rate of grade ≥ 3 adverse events was 0.6% (n = 1) in the RFA group and 1.1% (n = 1) in the SBRT group. CONCLUSIONS: The two treatment methods showed comparable outcomes in terms of LCR, OS rate, and IHRFS rate after IPTW adjustment. SBRT seems to be a viable alternative method for small hepatocellular carcinomas that are not suitable for RFA due to tumor location.