Backgrounds: This retrospective study was conducted to compare the clinical outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with those of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with lung tumors.
Methods: Local tumor progression, adverse events, and overall survival were compared in patients who underwent either RFA or SBRT for a single lung tumor measuring 5 cm or smaller. This study was approved by the institutional review boards of two institutions. Informed consent was waived.
Results: During September 2009 to June 2012, 48 patients [30 males and 18 females, with a mean age ± standard deviation (SD) of 75.0 ± 7.5 years] underwent RFA at one institution and 47 patients (21 males and 26 females, with a mean age ± SD of 77.0 ± 7.5 years) underwent SBRT in another. The mean maximum tumor diameter ± SD was 2.0 ± 0.8 cm (range 0.6-3.9 cm) in the RFA group, and 2.1 ± 0.9 cm (range 0.8-4.7 cm, p = 0.539) in the SBRT group. The RFA and SBRT groups showed similar 3-year local tumor progression [9.6%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.6-23.9% vs. 7.0%, 95% CI 0.2-20.2%, p = 0.746] and overall survival rates (86.4%, 95% CI 69.2-94.3% vs. 79.6%, 95% CI 60.6-90.1%, p = 0.738). No factor significantly affected local tumor progression. A maximum tumor size of 2 cm was identified as a prognostic factor in both univariate and multivariate analyses. No death was related to treatment procedures. Major complication rates (Grade 3 adverse events) of the RFA (10.4%, 5/48) and SBRT (8.5%, 4/47, p > 0.999) groups were similar.
Conclusion: For lung tumor patients, lung RFA provided local tumor control and survival that were similar to those achieved using SBRT, with equal safety.