Comparison of stereotactic body radiotherapy and radiofrequency ablation for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

BackgroundStereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are recommended for patients with inoperable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with both offering promising results. However, it is largely unknown which of these two treatment modalities provides superior benefits for patients. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis compared clinical outcomes and safety between SBRT and RFA in patients with inoperable early-stage NSCLC.MethodsEligible studies published between 2001 and 2020 were obtained through a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Original English-language studies on the treatment of early-stage NSCLC with SBRT or RFA were included. Local control (LC) rates, overall survival (OS) rates, and adverse events were obtained by pooled analyses.ResultsEighty-seven SBRT studies (12,811 patients) and 18 RFA studies (1,535 patients) met the eligibility criteria. For SBRT, the LC rates (with 95% confidence intervals) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years were 98% (97–98%), 95% (95–96%), 92% (91–93%), and 92% (91–93%), respectively, which were significantly higher than those for RFA [75% (69–82%), 31% (22–39%), 67% (58–76%), and 41% (30–52%), respectively] (P<0.01). There were no significant differences in short-term OS between SBRT and RFA [1-year OS rate: 87% (86–88%) versus 89% (88–91%), P=0.07; 2-year OS rate: 71% (69–72%) versus 69% (64–74%), P=0.42]. Regarding long-term OS, the 3- and 5-year OS rates for SBRT were 58% (56–59%) and 39% (37–40%), respectively, which were significantly (P<0.01) superior to those for RFA [48% (45–51%) and 21% (19–23%), respectively]. The most common complication of SBRT was radiation pneumonitis (grade ≥2), making up 9.1% of patients treated with SBRT, while pneumothorax was the most common complication of RFA, making up 27.2% of patients treated with RFA.DiscussionCompared with RFA, SBRT has superior LC and long-term OS rates but similar short-term OS rates. Prospective randomized trials with large sample sizes comparing the efficacy of SBRT and RFA are warranted.