| Literature DB >> 23721455 |
Marieke W J L A E Wertenbroek, Marianne Schepers, Hannetta J Kamminga-Rasker, Jan T Bottema, Anneke C Muller Kobold, Han Roelofsen, Koert P de Jong.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thermoablation is used to treat patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). We analyze clinical outcome, proteome kinetics and angiogenic markers in patients treated by cryosurgical ablation (CSA) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23721455 PMCID: PMC3698038 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-266
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Baseline patient and tumor characteristics
| n | 20 | 22 | 134 | 29 | |
| Median age (years) | 66.7 | 60.0 | 62.3 | 60.8 | 0.151 |
| (IQR) | (9.3) | (16.7) | (13.8) | (17.4) | |
| Sex | | | | | 0.392 |
| Female | 10 (50%) | 10 (45%) | 55 (41%) | 8 (28%) | |
| Male | 10 (50%) | 12 (55%) | 79 (59%) | 21(72%) | |
| Site of primary tumor | | | | | 0.732 |
| Colon | 12 (60%) | 15 (68%) | 84 (63%) | 21(72%) | |
| Rectum | 8 (40%) | 7 (32%) | 50 (37%) | 8 (28%) | |
| Synchronous: metachronous liver metastasis | 4:16 | 10:12 | 44:90 | 14:15 | 0.136 |
| Interval resection of primary tumor and detection liver metastasis | | | | | 0.385 |
| ≤12 months | 9 (45%) | 14 (64%) | 88 (66%) | 20 (69%) | |
| >12 months | 11(55%) | 8 (36%) | 46 (34%) | 9 (31%) | |
| Node status of primary tumor | | | | | 0.479 |
| Negative | 8 (40%) | 6 (27%) | 50 (37%) | 7 (24%) | |
| Positive | 12 (60%) | 16 (63%) | 84 (63%) | 22 (76%) | |
| Adjuvant chemotherapy after primary | | | | | 0.470 |
| No | 12 (60%) | 12 (55%) | 92 (69%) | 21 (72%) | |
| Yes | 8 (40%) | 10 (45%) | 42 (31%) | 8 (28%) | |
| Size largest metastasis (cm) | | | | | |
| Median (IQR) | 4.0 (2.0) | 3.0 (2.0) | 5.0 (4.5) | 3.5 (4.0)* | 0.440 |
| Number of liver metastases | | | | | <0.0001 |
| 1 | 10 (50%) | 6 (27%) | 86 (64%) | 6 (21%) | |
| >1 | 10 (50%) | 16 (63%) | 48 (36%) | 19 (66%) γ | |
| Preoperative CEA (μg/L) | | | | | |
| Median (IQR) | 21.2 (64.8) | 12.0 (57.0) | 22.5(71.4)$ | 20.0 (116.3)& | 0.623 |
| CRS | | | | | 0.009 |
| ≤2 | 15(75%) | 10 (46%) | 89 (66%) | | |
| >2 | 5 (25%) | 12 (55%) | 45 (34%) | | |
| Surgical procedure | | | | | <0.0001 |
| No resection | 13 (65%) | 11 (50%) | - | 29 (100%) | |
| < Hemihepatectomy | 6 (30%) | 7 (32%) | 36 (27%) | | |
| Hemihepatectomy | 1 (5%) | 3 (14%) | 56 (42%) | | |
| Extended | - | 1 (5%) | 42 (31%) | | |
| Hemihepatectomy |
*5 missing.
γ 4 missing.
$ 9 missing.
& 2 missing.
CSA, Cryosurgical ablation.
RFA, Radiofrequency ablation.
PH, Partial hepatectomy.
CEA, Carcinoembryonic antigen.
CRS, Clinical risk score.
Patterns of recurrence and survival after cryosurgical ablation (CSA), radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or partial hepatectomy (PH) of colorectal liver metastases
| | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 6 | 62 | |
| 18 | 16 | 72 | |
| 6 | 13 | 45 | |
| Abdomen (extrahepatic) | 1 | 4 | 8 |
| Liver remnant | 2 | 5 | 12 |
| Ablation site | 2 | 3 | |
| Lung/thorax | 1 | 1 | 20 |
| Other single sites | - | - | 5 |
| 12 | 3 | 27 | |
| 9 | 4 | | |
| - ablation site only | 2 | 3 | |
| - ablation site and other sites | 7 | 1 | |
| 8.5 | 9.0 | 9.0 | |
| (Range) | (3–44) | (2–31) | (3–72) |
| Median overall survival (months) | 17.6 | 51.7 | 43.4 |
| 5-year overall survival rate (%) | 5 | 38 | 42 |
Figure 1Kaplan-Meier survival plot of overall survival in patients with colorectal liver metastases according to treatment. Partial hepatectomy includes patients treated only by partial hepatectomy. Thermoablation includes patients treated with thermoablation with or without partial hepatectomy.
The relative risk of dying, recurrence and 95% confidence interval compared to the partial hepatectomy
| | | <0.0001 | | | <0.0001 | |
| PH | 1.00 | | | 1.00 | | |
| Truly unresectable | 2.63 | 1.43-4.82 | 0.002 | 2.63 | 1.43-4.82 | 0.002 |
| CSA | 3.27 | 1.99-5.37 | <0.0001 | 3.12 | 1.91-5.11 | <0.0001 |
| RFA | 0.84 | 0.49-1.45 | 0.54 | 0.84 | 0.50-1.43 | 0.52 |
| | | 0.002 | | | 0.002 | |
| 0 | 1.00 | | | 1.00 | | |
| 1 | 3.14 | 0.96-10.3 | 0.059 | 2.50 | 0.88-7.09 | 0.085 |
| 2 | 2.72 | 0.84-8.84 | 0.097 | 2.26 | 0.81-6.33 | 0.12 |
| 3 | 4.81 | 1.47-15.78 | 0.01 | 3.81 | 1.34-10.80 | 0.012 |
| 4 | 6.66 | 1.94-22.92 | 0.003 | 5.53 | 1.86-16.49 | 0.002 |
| 5 | 17.65 | 1.71-182.66 | 0.016 | 14.17 | 1.48-136.21 | 0.022 |
CI, Confidence interval.
PH, Partial hepatectomy.
CSA, Cryosurgical ablation.
RFA, Radiofrequency ablation.
Figure 2SELDI-TOF-MS proteomics time series analyses. Proteomics analyses of differences in serum protein abundance in samples obtained from six patients treated with radiofrequency ablation (RFA: ♦) and six patients treated with cryosurgical ablation (CSA: ■). Panel A: number of differences for RFA and CSA compared to time point −1 (before surgery). Panel B: AUC is higher at time points 1 through 4 for CSA than for RFA. Panel C: number of differences between RFA and CSA. Time −1 = day of admission; 0 = at the end of operation; 1–4 = postoperative days 1–4.
Figure 3Percentual change in angiogenic factors in patients treated with open ablation (CSA versus RFA). Panel A: VEGF, B: Tie-2, C: HGF, D: endostatin, E: Ang-1, F: Ang-2, G: Ratio Ang-2: Ang-1, H: Angiostatin. Thermoablation is associated with a pro-angiogenic response as reflected by an increase in serum levels of pro-angiogenic molecules (VEGF, Tie-2, Ang-2 and HGF). The response is comparable in patients with CSA and RFA treated tumors. Baseline values at time point −1 are set at 100%. Time −1 = day of admission; 0 = at the end of operation; 1–4 = postoperative days 1–4.