Next Article in Journal
HMGA2 Supports Cancer Hallmarks in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
Next Article in Special Issue
Results of Radiation Therapy as Local Ablative Therapy for Oligometastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Previous Article in Journal
No Need to Stick Together to Be Connected: Multiple Types of Enhancers’ Networking
Previous Article in Special Issue
Classifying Oligometastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Cancers
Volume 13
Issue 20
10.3390/cancers13205202
cancers-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Current Management of Oligometastatic Lung Cancer and Future Perspectives: Results of Thermal Ablation as a Local Ablative Therapy

by
Mario Ghosn
and
Stephen B. Solomon
*
Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Cancers 2021, 13(20), 5202; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13205202
Submission received: 20 August 2021 / Revised: 12 October 2021 / Accepted: 13 October 2021 / Published: 16 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Management of Oligometastatic Lung Cancer and Future Perspectives)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Up to 56% of lung cancer patients present with metastatic disease at initial diagnosis. Whereas these patients were historically deemed incurable, recent evidence supports the use of thermal ablation in stage IV non-small cell lung carcinoma with limited sites of metastasis (oligometastatic disease). In this review, we discuss the main results (local efficacy, overall survival, progression-free survival, safety and quality of life) of studies evaluating thermal ablation as a local ablative therapy for oligometastatic non-small cell lung carcinoma.

Abstract

A growing body of evidence shows improved overall survival and progression-free survival after thermal ablation in non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) patients with a limited number of metastases, combined with chemotherapy or tyrosine kinase inhibitors or after local recurrence. Radiofrequency ablation and microwave ablation are the most evaluated modalities, and target tumor size <3 cm (and preferably <2 cm) is a key factor of technical success and efficacy. Although thermal ablation offers some advantages over surgery and radiotherapy in terms of repeatability, safety, and quality of life, optimal management of these patients requires a multidisciplinary approach, and further randomized controlled trials are required to help refine patient selection criteria. In this article, we present a comprehensive review of available thermal ablation modalities and recent results supporting their use in oligometastatic and oligoprogressive NSCLC disease along with their potential future implications in the emerging field of immunotherapy.

1. Introduction

1.1. Local Ablation Therapy for Oligometastatic Disease

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death in the United States; up to 56% of patients present with metastatic disease at diagnosis [1]. Non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) accounts for 84% of all primary lung cancer cases, with a poor prognosis for stage IV patients and a 5 year overall survival (OS) ranging from 0 to 10% [2].
NSCLC metastatic patients were historically deemed incurable, and the use of local ablative therapies (LAT)—namely, surgery, thermal ablation (TA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)—was restricted to symptom control. There is a growing body of evidence suggesting a role for LAT in improving OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in a subset of stage IV patients characterized by limited sites of metastasis (oligometastatic disease) [3,4,5] or of disease progression while under systemic therapy (oligoprogressive disease) [6,7].

1.2. Potential Advantages of Thermal Ablation over Other LAT

Whereas surgery was the most commonly used therapy for oligometastatic NSCLC [8], TA [9] and SBRT [10,11] have emerged as less invasive, more efficient, and safe alternatives for well-selected patients. Indeed, only one-third of patients are considered candidates for lung resection due to associated comorbidities [12].
TA of tumors consists of focal delivery of extremely high (typically >55 °C) or extremely low temperatures that induce irreversible cellular damage and, consequently, coagulation necrosis [13]. The therapy is widely accepted for lung metastases [14,15,16], renal cancer [17], and in both primary [18] and secondary liver malignancies [19]. Encouraging results were similarly reported for stage I [20,21,22] and oligometastatic NSCLC patients [23], with TA yielding survival outcomes comparable to surgery and SBRT in well-selected patients.
TA offers several advantages over other LAT modalities. It is a minimally invasive therapy that preserves lung parenchyma [24,25] and thus can be used in patients with an insufficient pulmonary function that are excluded from surgery and radiotherapy. A prospective single-arm international trial evaluating 183 lung tumors treated with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in 106 patients showed no worsening in forced expiratory volume or forced vital capacity with regular visits over 1 year at follow-up [9]. Contrary to SBRT, TA is performed in a single session and can be repeated in case of recurrence [14], which is particularly relevant in the context of oligometastatic NSCLC patients, half of whom inevitably experience disease progression within 12 months [26]. TA has also been shown to improve patients’ quality of life by allowing a pause in chemotherapy (“chemoholiday”) for patients with primary colorectal cancer [27,28].

1.3. Indications of Thermal Ablation

Based on this evidence, TA was incorporated by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network into their guidelines for medically inoperable NSCLC patients with multiple lung cancers, no disease outside the chest, N0-1 status, limited (3 to 5) metastases, limited locoregional recurrence, limited (3 to 5) recurrence of distant metastases, and limited (3 to 5) sites of progression after therapy targeted to the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) [29]. In addition, the Society of Thoracic Surgery Expert Consensus on pulmonary metastasectomies recommended it as the first option for ipsilateral recurrence after surgery [30]. Authors also favored TA over stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for 2–3 cm oligometastatic lesions in these high-risk patients, notably due to its better safety profile for pulmonary function [30]. However, TA has its own complications and limitations, in particular regarding tumor size and location [31], underlining the need for careful patient selection.
In this article, we review available thermal ablation modalities and current evidence supporting their use in oligometastatic and oligoprogressive NSCLC disease along with their potential future implications in the emerging field of immunotherapy.

2. Thermal Ablation Modalities

Commonly used technologies for TA include RFA, microwave ablation (MWA), and cryoablation, each with its own physical principles, but all delivered through one or more applicators placed percutaneously under imaging guidance [32].

2.1. RFA

During RFA, a high-frequency alternating current is applied through a needle electrode placed in the target tumor, and the electrical circuit is closed by a grounding pad [33]. The electrical current induces rapid vibration of dipole molecules, which results in a local temperature increase and, consequently, coagulation necrosis and complete destruction of the tumor [34].
One of the major drawbacks of RFA is the heterogeneity of heat deposition due to its dependence on a given tissue’s electrical [35] and thermal conductivity. Aerated lungs have a high impedance (low electrical conductivity), limiting the current flow generated by the RFA antenna, and a low thermal conduction, restricting heat diffusion to the surrounding tissues [36]. RFA is also susceptible to the “heat sink” effect, whereby thermal energy dissipates through a vessel or airway proximal to the electrode [37], which can result in insufficient ablation margins and local tumor recurrence. Ablation zone size is also limited to 4–5 cm maximum smallest diameter, as only one single probe can be activated at a time [38].

2.2. MWA

MWA uses oscillating electromagnetic waves (300 MHz to 300 GHz) emitted by the antenna to induce rapid flip motion of surrounding water molecules and increase local temperature [39]. Since it is less dependent on tissues properties, MWA reaches higher temperatures than RFA, and does so faster as well [40]. It also allows larger ablation zones by enabling simultaneous activation of multiple probes [41]. Given these advantages and its lower susceptibility to heat sink effect, MWA is increasingly being used for the treatment of lung and liver malignancies [42]. The main limitations of this technology are a lack of sphericity and only moderate reproducibility of the ablation zones [43]. An example of MWA in a sixty-year-old woman with a 13 mm nodule in the apical segment of the left lower lobe is shown in Figure 1.

2.3. Cryoablation

In contrast to RFA and MWA, cryoablation is based on the Joule–Thompson principle and uses cold to induce cell death. Multiple cycles of freezing and thawing are applied, and several probes can be used to treat larger tumors [44]. The obtained “ice ball” is visualized under computed tomography, allowing for real-time control of the ablation zone [45]. Cryoablation also offers the advantage of being less painful [46] and less harmful to collagen structures such as bronchi and can be performed under local anesthesia [47].

3. Definition of Oligometastases and Rationale for Thermal Ablation

The concept of oligometastases was introduced in 1995 by Hellman and Weichselbaum [48] to characterize an intermediate state between a localized stage and a widely metastatic disease. This hypothesis of a continuum process of cancer spread was corroborated by long-term survival observed after aggressive local treatment in patients with a limited number of metastases, such as those with colorectal liver metastases or sarcoma lung metastases and, more recently, oligometastatic NSCLC patients [49].
The definition of oligometastatic NSCLC is beyond the scope of this review and will be further developed in another article of this special edition. Briefly, oligometastatic patients can present in three main situations:
  • Synchronous disease: patients that present at initial diagnosis with a limited number of metastases (mostly up to five) that are technically amenable to a radical treatment [50];
  • Oligoresidual disease: patients who initially had multiple metastases and responded to systemic therapy with only limited metastases remaining, all amenable to a radical treatment [51];
  • Metachronous disease (oligorecurrence): patients presenting with limited metastases after curative treatment to a locoregional disease, with an active disease now limited to the metastatic sites [52].

3.1. Adjuvant and Consolidation Therapy

Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy is the standard first-line therapy for most patients with advanced stage NSCLC, but is associated with only limited survival [53]. Because disease progression often occurs in original metastatic sites, it was hypothesized that the addition of LAT could help increase PFS and OS by eradicating the disease before it spreads, especially in patients presenting a limited number of metastases that did not progress after systemic treatment [54].
Improved survival in advanced stage NSCLC patients treated with TA in addition to chemotherapy or tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) was reported in relatively small cohorts [55,56,57,58,59] and was recently confirmed in two larger analyses of the National Cancer Database. The first compared outcomes of stage IV NSCLC patients treated with surgery + systemic therapy, external beam radiation therapy (EBRT)/TA + systemic therapy, and systemic therapy alone [60]. After multivariable adjustment, surgery had the highest OS among three treatment groups, and patients in the EBRT/TA group (n = 9539) had higher OS than those in the systemic therapy only (n = 24513) group (p = 0.002). The second compared OS of stage IIIB and IV patients that received TA to a matched cohort that was not treated with ablation and found an improved OS [61].

3.2. Salvage Therapy after Local Recurrence

Given its safety profile and its repeatability, TA has been used for local recurrence following surgery, SBRT, or TA for NSCLC [62,63,64]. Additionally, it has proven to be a safe therapy for recurrences occurring in the radiation field [65].
A retrospective study evaluated outcomes of different LAT modalities, including SABR (n = 15), surgery (n = 10), and RFA (n = 6), as a salvage therapy for recurrence after SABR in early-stage NSCLC patients [66]. The 5 year OS rate was not statistically different between patients that had salvage treatment (57%) after isolated local recurrence (same lobe as the primary treated tumor) and patients that did not experience recurrence (54.9%, p = 0.65). OS after salvage therapy of isolated regional recurrence (hilum or mediastina) was similar to that of stage III disease. Despite selection bias (given that RFA patients were excluded from surgery and SABR), no patients experienced any grade ≥3 toxicity with RFA, compared to 6.6% in the SABR group and 40% for surgery. Moreover, local recurrence did not seem to differ among the three modalities. Interestingly, 99% of recurrences had been confirmed by biopsy, highlighting again a major advantage of image-guided TA, where the operator has the possibility to re-biopsy the tumor before ablation and thus provide valuable information for mechanisms of TKI resistance and disease management [7].

4. Materials and Methods

The aim of this mini review is to describe local efficacy, survival, and safety of thermal ablation in oligometastatic NSCLC patients, mainly in lung and liver metastases. A search of the English literature in Pubmed was performed for the period from 2000 to May 2021 using the following items: non-small AND (thoracic OR lung OR pulmonary OR liver) AND (ablation OR radiofrequency OR microwave OR cryoablation) AND (oligometastases OR oligometastasis OR oligoprogression OR metastases OR metastasis). The search was limited to human subjects and yielded 149 publications, and the papers most relevant to oligometastatic and oligoprogressive NSCLC patients treated with TA were included. Publications from selected article reference lists were also screened.

5. Results

The main outcomes of selected studies evaluating the role of TA in oligometastatic NSCLC patients are presented in Table 1 (prospective studies) [9,67,68,69] and Table 2 (retrospective studies) [55,70,71,72,73,74,75,76]. Only outcomes relevant to oligometastatic NSCLC patients were reported when available.

5.1. Survival

5.1.1. Lung

Due to the heterogeneity of inclusion criteria (synchronous vs. metachronous disease; number, location, and size of metastatic sites; type of concomitant or adjuvant therapies; ablation techniques), reported median OS and PFS of oligometastatic patients treated with TA ranged between 14 to 41.6 months and 16 weeks to 23.5 months, respectively (Table 1 and Table 2). Some authors also reported survival results among other LAT modalities [7,67,68,75] or with stage I disease [9], making it difficult to extrapolate these results to the specific population of oligometastatic NSCLC patients treated with TA. However, it is noteworthy that these results are in line with those published by a systematic review on SBRT in oligometastatic extra-cranial NSCLC patients that reported a median OS ranging from 13.5 to 55 months and a PFS range of 4.4 to 14.7 months [77].
The association of TA with chemotherapy and/or TKI has been evaluated in different temporal combinations. For example, Ni et al. evaluated MWA as consolidation therapy for synchronous extracranial oligometastatic disease that did not progress after first-line therapy by EGFR-TKI. The addition of MWA was associated with a statistically significant increase in median PFS (16.7 vs. 12.9 months, p = 0.02) and median OS (34.8 vs. 22.7 months, p = 0.04) compared to TKI alone group [71]. This improvement in patient survival was confirmed in a single-phase II trial that also evaluated outcomes of LAT (including two patients treated with TA) as consolidation therapy following TKI or chemotherapy, with a median PFS of 23.5 months. Median OS was not reached after a median follow-up of 32.5 months. [67]. The authors found no differences in OS regarding age, sex, number of metastases, or presence of an actionable mutation [67].
In a different manner, Wei et al. conducted the first phase III randomized controlled trial that compared MWA followed by platinum-based doublet chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy alone in stage IIIB and IV NSCLC patients. Although the number of metastases was not reported, the authors showed an increase in PFS and OS in the MWA + chemotherapy arm. The difference remained statistically significant in the subgroup of stage IV patients, with a median PFS of 20.6 months and a median OS of 24.2 months (vs. 4.9 months and 12.4 months in the chemotherapy arm, respectively) [69]. A single arm phase II trial [68] showed that LAT to all known sites of disease can also be beneficial if performed before treatment by immunotherapy (pembrolizumab). Although only one patient had RFA, authors reported a median PFS of 19.1 months, compared to a historical median of 6.6 months (p = 0.005).
TA has also been used for local recurrence following surgery, SBRT or TA for NSCLC [62,63,64]. In selected studies, the 5 year survival rate was 55.7% post-surgical recurrence [72], and median OS reached 35 months for local recurrence after EBRT [74]. Tumor size ≤3 cm was again found to be associated with OS and PFS [72,73].

5.1.2. Liver

Improved outcomes were also reported for metachronous or synchronous NSCLC liver metastases [76], with patients treated with TA + chemotherapy or TKI yielding higher PFS than those treated with only chemotherapy (11.0 vs. 5.2 months; p = 0.001). Although a similar trend was observed for OS, the difference was not statistically significant (27.7 vs. 17.7 months; p = 0.152). N3 nodal stage, ECOG status of one, and a number of three liver metastases were associated with a lower PFS. Another study by Tseng et al. [78] also associated ≤ five adenocarcinoma liver metastases with survival.

5.2. Oligoprogressive Disease

While revolutionizing the treatment of advanced stage NSCLC patients harboring EGFR and ALK mutations, TKI has nevertheless been challenged by the emergence of tumoral resistance, which shortens the duration of response and eventually leads to disease progression. Weickhardt et al. hypothesized that LAT could eradicate developing resistant clones before they spread and showed that surgery or radiotherapy could delay disease progression by 6 months in patients with EGFR or ALK mutations receiving erlotinib or crizotinib, respectively [79]. Interestingly, 49% of patients treated by erlotinib or crizotinib were eligible for this treatment strategy.
Selected studies reporting outcomes of TA in oligoprogressive NSCLC patients are summarized in Table 3 [7,75,80]. The three selected studies were retrospective, did not report follow-up time, and variously defined PFS1 and PFS2. In the largest retrospective study evaluating TA in this indication, Ni et al. [80] included 71 patients harboring EGFR mutation with extra-central nervous system oligoprogressive disease (defined as three or fewer metastases in one or two organs) after first-line therapy with erlotinib, gefitinib, icotinib, or afatinib. RFA or MWA were applied to all progressing sites of disease in association with the continuation of TKI and resulted in an extension of PFS by a median of 10.0 months, with a median OS of 26.4 months (range: 6–86 months).

5.3. Prognostic Factors

Appropriate patient selection is key for improved survival outcomes. Significant prognosis factors of OS include tumor size ≤3 cm [72,73], the addition of TA [70], and ECOG status [64,70]. Tumor histology may also influence survival outcomes, as suggested by Jiang et al. [75], who found a significant association between adenocarcinoma and PFS upon multivariate analysis. In one of the largest prospective series of RFA in lungs, which evaluated 1037 metastases from different primary histologies, mostly from colon, rectum, and kidney, the number of metastases was associated with OS [14]. However, given the lack of consensus, selected studies in oligometastatic NSCLC (Table 1 and Table 2) used different cut-offs, ranging between three and five metastatic sites. It is still too early to draw conclusions about the optimal number of metastases to treat. SABR-COMET-3 [81] and SABR-COMET-10 [82]—two randomized controlled phase III trials that will evaluate long-term survival outcomes for patients with 1 to 3 and 4 to 10 oligometastatic lesions, respectively—will provide insights to help define patient selection criteria. Finally, disease-free intervals have been associated with OS [14,23] and are a well-known factor of tumor biology that also must be considered.

5.4. Local Efficacy and Predictors of Recurrence

Local efficacy (absence of tumoral recurrence at the ablation site) ranged between 82% to 88% in prospective studies [9,69], and 55% to 92% in retrospective studies [55,74]. After repeat ablation, 5 year secondary local tumor progression even reached 5.4% [72]. Indeed, contrary to SBRT, TA can be repeated without additional morbidity, with similar survival outcomes compared to patients that did not experience tumor recurrence [64].
Tumor size <2–3 cm is a well-known factor of improved local control [22,83,84]. Different tumor sizes included in studies evaluating TA in oligometastatic NSCLC (Table 1 and Table 2) may thus explain variability in local control rates. For example, Cheng et al. included tumors up to 61mm in diameter, which possibly resulted in the high local progression rate of 45% at 1 year [74]. However, time to local progression for tumors <3 cm was 23 months (vs. 14 months for tumors >3 cm), similar to results by Schoellnast et al. that reported a time to local progression of 24 months for tumors <3 cm (vs. 8 months in larger tumors, p = 0.07) [73].
Local tumor control has also been shown to be associated with the absence of contact with a large vessel or a large bronchus [85,86] and complete coverage of tumor by the ablation zone with a margin of 5–10 mm [87,88]. In a matched case–control study [31], 48 patients with first local tumor progression after RFA were matched to a control group of 112 patients to control for nodule size (±5 mm tolerance), nodule number (≤2 vs. ≥3), and primary histological type (categories: colon, rectum, other). In the multiple regression model, only an ablation margin ≤5 mm remained a risk factor of local tumor progression. A distance ≤5 mm to a bronchus or a vessel >3 mm diameter was associated with insufficient ablation margins, and the authors point out the need to consider these factors in algorithmic decision-making.
Concerning tumor histology, Lencioni et al. reported no statistically significant difference in response between NSCLC and lung metastases [9], in line with a systematic review of prognostic factors of local recurrence after MWA in the lung [89] that found no association between local recurrence and the number of metastases, primary tumor histology, or disease-free interval. Interestingly, local recurrence was lower in recent studies and below 20% in patients enrolled after 2016, probably due to operators’ learning curves, technological advances in microwave devices, and improved methods for targeting and assessment [89].
Ablation modalities were also different: some authors used RFA [9], others preferred MWA [71], cryoablation [55], or a combination [76]. It is unclear whether this affected the ablation outcomes. Indeed, a retrospective study showed similar local efficacy for MWA and RFA, with a local recurrence rate of 3.7% and 7.6% (p = 0.32), respectively, after a mean follow-up of 488 +/− 407 days [90]. A recent meta-analysis of 53 studies conducted from 2010 to 2017 [91] reported complete ablation rates of 86.1% and 81.1% and median local tumor PFSs of 22.0 months and 31.5 months for RFA and MWA, respectively (p = 0.249). No statistically significant difference was observed for 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 year local tumor PFS. Subgroup analysis showed no difference in median OS between RFA (28.4 months) and MWA (24.4 months) groups. In liver, no difference was observed in terms of local efficacy between RFA and MWA, although long-term recurrence seemed lower with MWA [92].

5.5. Safety and Quality of Life

The preservation of patients’ quality of life is a major strength of TA [9]. Most reported complications were minor, self-limited [9,69,70,71,72], and did not prolong hospital stay, with a reported median of 1 to 3 days [9,73]. Only 10% to 29% of pneumothoraxes required a chest tube placement [69,73], often removed in 1 day without altering the patients’ quality of life, as demonstrated in the ECLIPSE trial [93], which questions its clinical significance [94]. In comparison, a chest tube is often placed following lung surgery, entailing longer durations and longer hospital stays [95]. Common complications include pain, pleural effusion not needing treatment, and self-limited intrapulmonary hemorrhage [9,69,70,71,72]. In addition, TA did not alter the course of systemic therapies, with similar adverse events found when MWA was combined with chemotherapy (but not in the chemotherapy alone group [69]), and no reported TKI discontinuation because of MWA [71].
In summary, TA’s local safety and efficacy has been well-proven in oligometastatic NSCLC, given careful selection of patients. Important selection criteria include tumor size <3 cm, distance from large vessels and airways, and ablation margins >5 mm. Whereas MWA and cryoablation offer some interesting advantages over RFA, choice of ablation modality still depends on the operator’s experience, since none of these techniques have proven inherently superior [91,92,96].

5.6. Comparison to Other LAT Modalities

Comparisons of different LAT modalities in terms of survival outcomes are limited by the heterogeneity of published studies. Moreover, patients evaluated in TA series often had several comorbidities and were contra-indicated to surgery or SBRT, making any comparison subject to a major selection bias. Although randomized controlled trials are needed to delineate the role of each therapy in the management of oligometastatic NSCLC patients, a growing body of evidence suggests that TA is not inferior to lung resection or SBRT in carefully selected patients, as shown by Hasegawa et al. for oligometastatic colorectal lung metastases ≤3 cm [97], or by a large series on lung metastases [14] that yielded similar local control rates and similar OS.
These results are further supported by several studies that retrospectively compared TA to lung resection [98,99,100] and SBRT [101] in stage I NSCLC selected patients. In a comparison of early-stage NSCLC patients treated with SBRT (n = 14,651) and TA (n = 1141), SBRT showed similar OS than TA for tumors ≤2 cm [102], highlighting again the need for careful patient selection.
In sum, although it is acknowledged that most of the literature evaluating TA in oligometastatic NSCLC consists of small series, mostly retrospective without a controlled arm, there is enough evidence to suggest a clinical benefit to treating oligometastatic NSCLC patients with TA, with an efficacy similar to surgery and SBRT. Combining these therapies might be interesting in some cases, and choosing the optimal LAT for each individual patient requires a multidisciplinary team that includes thoracic surgeons, oncologists, and interventional radiologists experienced in lung ablations; indeed, a multidisciplinary approach has been repeatedly proposed [29,30], as collaboration has been shown to increase adherence to clinical guidelines and may also improve patients’ quality of life [103].
Based on the results of this review, previously published recommendations on lung metastases by Handy et al. [30] and Najafi et al. [104], and the recent Society of Thoracic Surgeons webinar on pulmonary metastasectomy [105], we propose an algorithm to help choose the optimal local ablation therapy among surgery, SBRT and TA, illustrated in Figure 2.

6. Future Perspectives in the Era of Immunotherapies

The antibodies anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) have recently emerged as new therapeutic options for non-oncogene-driven advanced stage NSCLC patients [106]. Despite impressive clinical results, the majority of patients develop primary or secondary resistance, stressing the need for new strategies to overcome these shortcomings [107]. By boosting the immune response, TA may play a major role in this setting, in particular when associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI).
Contrary to surgical resection, TA not only eradicates the tumor locally but also leaves tumor neoantigens and associated antigens in situ [13]. Such an approach can activate a systemic immune response, which, in turn, can eliminate distant no-target metastases. Since this so-called “abscopal effect” is rarely observed and rarely reproduced, studies focus instead on associating TA and immunomodulation in order to enhance therapeutic efficacy and provide a sustainable anti-tumoral response.
Several pre-clinical studies supporting this hypothesis show improved survival and tumor control with combination therapies [108]. Among different TA modalities, cryoablation has received the most interest, as higher pro-inflammatory cytokine levels (including interleukin 1 and interleukin 6) observed after cryoablation suggest a greater immune response than that of RFA and MWA [13]. Additionally, cold injury induces less protein denaturation then heat-based TA and preserves intracytoplasmic content, thus potentially releasing more antigens into systemic circulation [13]. An ongoing phase II clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03290677) is evaluating the safety and feasibility of cryoablation of growing tumors in stage IV lung cancer patients progressing under ICI; the authors will assess the radiological response rate as a secondary outcome. The CRYOVATE trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04793815) will evaluate the role of cryoablation in advanced/metastatic or unresectable NSCLC patients (PD-L1 ≥50%) that will be subsequently treated with pembrolizumab (anti-PD-1) monotherapy. Regarding safety, a recent study evaluating the combination of TA and ICI [109] reported no adverse events among all 12 treated NSCLC patients.
Research in this field is, however, in its beginnings, with very limited results in humans and many questions remaining to be answered, such as those regarding the types of induced immune response, appropriate ablation modality, and the most beneficial and synergistic combinations [110].

7. Conclusions

In conclusion, thermal ablation is a minimally invasive therapy that offers some advantages over surgery and radiotherapy. Although randomized studies are still lacking, a growing body of evidence supports its use in NSCLC patients with a limited number of metastases, combined with chemotherapy or tyrosine kinase inhibitors or after local recurrence. A target tumor size <3 cm (and preferably <2 cm) remains a key factor of technical success and clinical efficacy. Optimal patient management requires a multidisciplinary approach, and further randomized controlled trials are needed to help refine patient selection criteria and treatment modalities.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.G. and S.B.S.; writing—original draft preparation, M.G.; writing—review and editing, M.G. and S.B.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

M.G. is a grant recipient for a post doc research fellowship from General Electric. S.B.S. receives grants from Johnson & Johnson, Elesta, GE, and AngioDynamics and is a consultant for Olympus and Varian.

References

  1. Siegel, R.L.; Miller, K.D.; Jemal, A. Cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2020, 70, 7–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Goldstraw, P.; Chansky, K.; Crowley, J.; Rami-Porta, R.; Asamura, H.; Eberhardt, W.E.; Nicholson, A.G.; Groome, P.; Mitchell, A.; Bolejack, V.; et al. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for Revision of the TNM Stage Groupings in the Forthcoming (Eighth) Edition of the TNM Classification for Lung Cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2016, 11, 39–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Blake-Cerda, M.; Lozano-Ruíz, F.; Maldonado-Magos, F.; de la Mata-Moya, D.; Díaz-García, D.; Lara-Mejía, L.; Zatarain-Barrón, Z.L.; Cuevas-Góngora, M.F.; Barron-Barron, F.; Corona-Cruz, J.F.; et al. Consolidative stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) to intrapulmonary lesions is associated with prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival in oligometastatic NSCLC patients: A prospective phase 2 study. Lung Cancer 2021, 152, 119–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Okubo, K.; Bando, T.; Miyahara, R.; Sakai, H.; Shoji, T.; Sonobe, M.; Fujinaga, T.; Sato, K.; Wada, H.; Tanaka, T. Resection of Pulmonary Metastasis of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2009, 4, 203–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Gomez, D.R.; Tang, C.; Zhang, J.; Blumenschein, G.R., Jr.; Hernandez, M.; Lee, J.J.; Ye, R.; Palma, D.A.; Louie, A.V.; Camidge, D.R.; et al. Local Consolidative Therapy vs. Maintenance Therapy or Observation for Patients With Oligometastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Long-Term Results of a Multi-Institutional, Phase II, Randomized Study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2019, 37, 1558–1565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Buglione, M.; Jereczek-Fossa, B.A.; Bonù, M.L.; Franceschini, D.; Fodor, A.; Zanetti, I.B.; Gerardi, M.A.; Borghetti, P.; Tomasini, D.; Di Muzio, N.G.; et al. Radiosurgery and fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy in oligometastatic/oligoprogressive non-small cell lung cancer patients: Results of a multi-institutional series of 198 patients treated with “curative” intent. Lung Cancer 2020, 141, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Yu, H.A.; Sima, C.S.; Huang, J.; Solomon, S.B.; Rimner, A.; Paik, P.; Pietanza, M.C.; Azzoli, C.G.; Rizvi, N.A.; Krug, L.M.; et al. Local therapy with continued EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy as a treatment strategy in EGFR-mutant advanced lung cancers that have developed acquired resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2013, 8, 346–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Pfannschmidt, J.; Dienemann, H. Surgical treatment of oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2010, 69, 251–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Lencioni, R.; Crocetti, L.; Cioni, R.; Suh, R.; Glenn, D.; Regge, D.; Helmberger, T.; Gillams, A.R.; Frilling, A.; Ambrogi, M.; et al. Response to radiofrequency ablation of pulmonary tumours: A prospective, intention-to-treat, multicentre clinical trial (the RAPTURE study). Lancet Oncol. 2008, 9, 621–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lehrer, E.J.; Singh, R.; Wang, M.; Chinchilli, V.M.; Trifiletti, D.M.; Ost, P.; Siva, S.; Meng, M.B.; Tchelebi, L.; Zaorsky, N.G. Safety and Survival Rates Associated With Ablative Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Patients With Oligometastatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol. 2021, 7, 92–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Palma, D.A.; Olson, R.; Harrow, S.; Gaede, S.; Louie, A.V.; Haasbeek, C.; Mulroy, L.; Lock, M.; Rodrigues, G.B.; Yaremko, B.P.; et al. Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for the Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastatic Cancers: Long-Term Results of the SABR-COMET Phase II Randomized Trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 2020, 38, 2830–2838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Mazzone, P. Preoperative evaluation of the lung resection candidate. Cleve Clin. J. Med. 2012, 79 (Suppl. 1), eS17–eS22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Chu, K.F.; Dupuy, D. Thermal ablation of tumours: Biological mechanisms and advances in therapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2014, 14, 199–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. De Baère, T.; Aupérin, A.; Deschamps, F.; Chevallier, P.; Gaubert, Y.; Boige, V.; Fonck, M.; Escudier, B.; Palussiére, J. Radiofrequency ablation is a valid treatment option for lung metastases: Experience in 566 patients with 1037 metastases. Ann. Oncol. 2015, 26, 987–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Petre, E.N.; Jia, X.; Thornton, R.H.; Sofocleous, C.T.; Alago, W.; Kemeny, N.E.; Solomon, S.B. Treatment of Pulmonary Colorectal Metastases by Radiofrequency Ablation. Clin. Color. Cancer 2013, 12, 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  16. Zhong, J.; Palkhi, E.; Ng, H.H.L.; Wang, K.; Milton, R.; Chaudhuri, N.; Lenton, J.; Smith, J.; Bhartia, B.; Wah, T.M. Long-Term Outcomes in Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation for Histologically Proven Colorectal Lung Metastasis. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol. 2020, 43, 1900–1907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Sanchez, A.; Feldman, A.S.; Hakimi, A.A. Current Management of Small Renal Masses, Including Patient Selection, Renal Tumor Biopsy, Active Surveillance, and Thermal Ablation. J. Clin. Oncol. 2018, 36, 3591–3600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. European Association For The Study Of The Liver. EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Hepatol. 2018, 69, 182–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Decadt, B.; Siriwardena, A.K. Radiofrequency ablation of liver tumours: Systematic review. Lancet Oncol. 2004, 5, 550–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ambrogi, M.C.; Fanucchi, O.; Cioni, R.; Dini, P.; De Liperi, A.; Cappelli, C.; Davini, F.; Bartolozzi, C.; Mussi, A. Long-Term Results of Radiofrequency Ablation Treatment of Stage I Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Prospective Intention-to-Treat Study. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2011, 6, 2044–2051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Dupuy, D.E.; Fernando, H.C.; Ms, S.H.; Ng, T.; Bs, A.D.T.; Sharma, A.; Rilling, W.S.; Hong, K.; Putnam, J.B. Radiofrequency ablation of stage IA non-small cell lung cancer in medically inoperable patients: Results from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z4033 (Alliance) trial. Cancer 2015, 121, 3491–3498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Palussiere, J.; Lagarde, P.; Aupérin, A.; Deschamps, F.; Chomy, F.; de Baere, T. Percutaneous lung thermal ablation of non-surgical clinical N0 non-small cell lung cancer: Results of eight years’ experience in 87 patients from two centers. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol. 2015, 38, 160–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Omae, K.; Hiraki, T.; Gobara, H.; Iguchi, T.; Fujiwara, H.; Matsui, Y.; Toyooka, S.; Nagasaka, T.; Kanazawa, S. Long-Term Survival after Radiofrequency Ablation of Lung Oligometastases from Five Types of Primary Lesions: A Retrospective Evaluation. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2016, 27, 1362–1370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Ambrogi, M.C.; Fontanini, G.; Cioni, R.; Faviana, P.; Fanucchi, O.; Mussi, A. Biologic effects of radiofrequency thermal ablation on non-small cell lung cancer: Results of a pilot study. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2006, 131, 1002–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Tada, A.; Hiraki, T.; Iguchi, T.; Gobara, H.; Mimura, H.; Toyooka, S.; Kiura, K.; Tsuda, T.; Mitsuhashi, T.; Kanazawa, S. Influence of radiof-requency ablation of lung cancer on pulmonary function. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol. 2012, 35, 860–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Ashworth, A.; Rodrigues, G.; Boldt, G.; Palma, D. Is there an oligometastatic state in non-small cell lung cancer? A systematic review of the literature. Lung Cancer 2013, 82, 197–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Fonck, M.; Perez, J.-T.; Catena, V.; Becouarn, Y.; Cany, L.; Brudieux, E.; Vayre, L.; Texereau, P.; Le Brun-Ly, V.; Verger, V.; et al. Pulmonary Thermal Ablation Enables Long Chemotherapy-Free Survival in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol. 2018, 41, 1727–1734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Delpla, A.; de Baere, T.; Varin, E.; Deschamps, F.; Roux, C.; Tselikas, L. Role of Thermal Ablation in Colorectal Cancer Lung Metastases. Cancers 2021, 13, 908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (Version 4.2021). National Comprehensive Cancer Network. 2021. Available online: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/nscl.pdf (accessed on 21 April 2021).
  30. Handy, J.R.; Bremner, R.M.; Crocenzi, T.S.; Detterbeck, F.C.; Fernando, H.C.; Fidias, P.M.; Firestone, S.; Johnstone, C.A.; Lanuti, M.; Litle, V.R.; et al. Expert Consensus Document on Pulmonary Metastasectomy. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2019, 107, 631–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Najafi, A.; de Baere, T.; Purenne, E.; Bayar, A.; Al Ahmar, M.; Delpla, A.; Roux, C.; Madani, K.; Assouline, J.; Deschamps, F.; et al. Risk factors for local tumor progression after RFA of pulmonary metastases: A matched case-control study. Eur. Radiol. 2021, 31, 5361–5369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Hinshaw, J.L.; Lubner, M.G.; Ziemlewicz, T.J.; Lee, F.T., Jr.; Brace, C.L. Percutaneous tumor ablation tools: Microwave, radiofrequency, or cryoablation—What should you use and why? Radiographics 2014, 34, 1344–1362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hong, K.; Georgiades, C. Radiofrequency Ablation: Mechanism of Action and Devices. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2010, 21, S179–S186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Jaskolka, J.D.; Kachura, J.R.; Hwang, D.M.; Tsao, M.S.; Waddell, T.K.; Asch, M.R.; Darling, G.E.; Johnston, M.R. Pathologic assessment of ra-diofrequency ablation of pulmonary metastases. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2010, 21, 1689–1696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Solazzo, S.A.; Liu, Z.; Lobo, S.M.; Ahmed, M.; Hines-Peralta, A.U.; Lenkinski, R.; Goldberg, S.N. Radiofrequency Ablation: Importance of Background Tissue Electrical Conductivity—An Agar Phantom and Computer Modeling Study. Radiology 2005, 236, 495–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Brace, C.L. Radiofrequency and microwave ablation of the liver, lung, kidney, and bone: What are the differences? Curr. Probl. Diagn Radiol. 2009, 38, 135–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  37. Steinke, K.; Haghighi, K.S.; Wulf, S.; Morris, D.L. Effect of vessel diameter on the creation of ovine lung radiofrequency lesions in vivo: Preliminary results. J. Surg. Res. 2005, 124, 85–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. De Baere, T.; Tselikas, L.; Gravel, G.; Deschamps, F. Lung ablation: Best practice/results/response assessment/role alongside other ablative therapies. Clin. Radiol. 2017, 72, 657–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Simon, C.J.; Dupuy, D.; Mayo-Smith, W.W. Microwave Ablation: Principles and Applications. RadioGraphics 2005, 25, S69–S83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Brace, C.L.; Hinshaw, J.L.; Laeseke, P.F.; Sampson, L.A.; Lee, F.T., Jr. Pulmonary thermal ablation: Comparison of radiofrequency and microwave devices by using gross pathologic and CT findings in a swine model. Radiology 2009, 251, 705–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Wolf, F.J.; Grand, D.J.; Machan, J.T.; Dipetrillo, T.A.; Mayo-Smith, W.W.; Dupuy, D.E. Microwave ablation of lung malignancies: Effectiveness, CT findings, and safety in 50 patients. Radiology 2008, 247, 871–879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Vietti Violi, N.; Duran, R.; Guiu, B.; Cercueil, J.P.; Aubé, C.; Digklia, A.; Pache, I.; Deltenre, P.; Knebel, J.F.; Denys, A. Efficacy of microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic liver disease: A randomised controlled phase 2 trial. Lancet Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2018, 3, 317–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Prud’Homme, C.; Teriitehau, C.; Adam, J.; Tun, J.K.; Roux, C.; Hakime, A.; Delpla, A.; Deschamps, F.; de Baere, T.; Tselikas, L. Lung microwave ablation—An in vivo swine tumor model experiment to evaluate ablation zones. Int. J. Hyperth. 2020, 37, 879–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Niu, L.; Xu, K.; Mu, F. Cryosurgery for lung cancer. J. Thorac. Dis. 2012, 4, 408–419. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  45. Ito, N.; Nakatsuka, S.; Inoue, M.; Yashiro, H.; Oguro, S.; Izumi, Y.; Kawamura, M.; Nomori, H.; Kuribayashi, S. Computed Tomographic Appearance of Lung Tumors Treated with Percutaneous Cryoablation. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2012, 23, 1043–1052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Das, S.K.; Huang, Y.; Li, B.; Yu, X.X.; Xiao, R.H.; Yang, H.F. Comparing cryoablation and microwave ablation for the treatment of patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer. Oncol. Lett. 2019, 19, 1031–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Inoue, M.; Nakatsuka, S.; Yashiro, H.; Ito, N.; Izumi, Y.; Yamauchi, Y.; Hashimoto, K.; Asakura, K.; Tsukada, N.; Kawamura, M.; et al. Percutaneous Cryoablation of Lung Tumors: Feasibility and Safety. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2012, 23, 295–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Hellman, S.; Weichselbaum, R.R. Oligometastases. J. Clin. Oncol. 1995, 13, 8–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Kim, C.; Hoang, C.D.; Kesarwala, A.; Schrump, D.S.; Guha, U.; Rajan, A. Role of Local Ablative Therapy in Patients with Oligometastatic and Oligoprogressive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2017, 12, 179–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Dingemans, A.-M.C.; Hendriks, L.E.; Berghmans, T.; Levy, A.; Hasan, B.; Faivre-Finn, C.; Levra, M.G.; Giaj-Levra, N.; Girard, N.; Greillier, L.; et al. Definition of Synchronous Oligometastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer—A Consensus Report. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2019, 14, 2109–2119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Wujanto, C.; Vellayappan, B.; Siva, S.; Louie, A.V.; Guckenberger, M.; Slotman, B.J.; Onishi, H.; Nagata, Y.; Liu, M.; Lo, S.S. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Oligometastatic Disease in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer. Front. Oncol. 2019, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Niibe, Y.; Hayakawa, K. Oligometastases and Oligo-recurrence: The New Era of Cancer Therapy. Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol. 2010, 40, 107–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Group, NSCLC Meta-Analyses Collaborative. Chemotherapy in addition to supportive care improves survival in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from 16 randomized controlled trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 2008, 26, 4617–4625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Iyengar, P.; Wardak, Z.; Gerber, D.E.; Tumati, V.; Ahn, C.; Hughes, R.S.; Dowell, J.E.; Cheedella, N.; Nedzi, L.; Westover, K.D.; et al. Consolidative Radiotherapy for Limited Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2018, 4, e173501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Bang, H.J.; Littrup, P.J.; Currier, B.P.; Goodrich, D.J.; Aoun, H.D.; Klein, L.C.; Kuo, J.C.; Heilbrun, L.K.; Gadgeel, S.; Goodman, A.C. Percutaneous cryoablation of metastatic lesions from non-small-cell lung carcinoma: Initial survival, local control, and cost observations. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2012, 23, 761–769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  56. Gao, Y.; Chen, J.; Zhang, J.; Sun, L.; Zhuang, Y. Radiofrequency ablation of primary non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective study on 108 patients. Chemotherapy 2019, 24, 1610–1618. [Google Scholar]
  57. Zhong, L.; Sun, S.; Shi, J.; Cao, F.; Han, X.; Bao, X.; You, Q. Clinical analysis on 113 patients with lung cancer treated by percutaneous CT-guided microwave ablation. J. Thorac. Dis. 2017, 9, 590–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  58. Lee, H.; Jin, G.Y.; Han, Y.M.; Chung, G.H.; Lee, Y.C.; Kwon, K.S.; Lynch, D. Comparison of Survival Rate in Primary Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Among Elderly Patients Treated With Radiofrequency Ablation, Surgery, or Chemotherapy. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol. 2011, 35, 343–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Gu, X.Y.; Jiang, Z.; Fang, W. Cryoablation Combined with Molecular Target Therapy Improves the Curative Effect in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. J. Int. Med. Res. 2011, 39, 1736–1743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Uhlig, J.; Case, M.D.; Blasberg, J.D.; Boffa, D.J.; Chiang, A.; Gettinger, S.N.; Kim, H.S. Comparison of Survival Rates After a Combination of Local Treatment and Systemic Therapy vs. Systemic Therapy Alone for Treatment of Stage IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. JAMA Netw. Open 2019, 2, e199702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Halsey, K.; Wu, J.; Su, C.; Hsieh, B.; Yi, T.; Collins, S.A.; Kimia, B.; Zhang, P.J.; Healey, T.; Zhang, Z.; et al. Ablation Therapy for Advanced Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A National Cancer Database Study. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2020, 31, 1210–1215.e4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Brooks, E.D.; Verma, V.; Senan, S.; De Baere, T.; Lu, S.; Brunelli, A.; Chang, J.Y. International Association for the Study of Lung Can-cer Advanced Radiation Technology Committee, Salvage Therapy for Locoregional Recurrence After Stereotactic Ablative Radio-therapy for Early-Stage NSCLC. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2020, 15, 176–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Fernando, H.; De Hoyos, A.; Landreneau, R.J.; Gilbert, S.; Gooding, W.E.; Buenaventura, P.O.; Christie, N.A.; Belani, C.; Luketich, J.D. Radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer in marginal surgical candidates. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2005, 129, 639–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Ye, X.; Yang, X.; Huang, G.; Han, X.; Wang, J.; Li, W.; Wei, Z.; Meng, M. Repeated percutaneous microwave ablation for local recurrence of inoperable Stage I nonsmall cell lung cancer. J. Cancer Res. Ther. 2017, 13, 683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Leung, V.A.; DiPetrillo, T.A.; Dupuy, D. Image-guided tumor ablation for the treatment of recurrent non-small cell lung cancer within the radiation field. Eur. J. Radiol. 2011, 80, e491–e499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Brooks, E.D.; Sun, B.; Feng, L.; Verma, V.; Zhao, L.; Gomez, D.R.; Liao, Z.; Jeter, M.; O’Reilly, M.; Welsh, J.W.; et al. Association of Long-term Outcomes and Survival With Multidisciplinary Salvage Treatment for Local and Regional Recurrence After Stereotactic Ablative Radio-therapy for Early-Stage Lung Cancer. JAMA Netw Open 2018, 1, e181390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Arrieta, O.; Barrón, F.; Maldonado, F.; Cabrera, L.; Corona-Cruz, J.F.; Blake, M.; Ramírez-Tirado, L.A.; Zatarain-Barrón, Z.L.; Cardona, A.F.; García, O.; et al. Radical consolidative treatment provides a clinical benefit and long-term survival in patients with synchronous oli-gometastatic non-small cell lung cancer: A phase II study. Lung Cancer 2019, 130, 67–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Bauml, J.M.; Mick, R.; Ciunci, C.; Aggarwal, C.; Davis, C.; Evans, T.; Deshpande, C.; Miller, L.; Patel, P.; Alley, E.; et al. Pembrolizumab After Completion of Locally Ablative Therapy for Oligometastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase 2 Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2019, 5, 1283–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Wei, Z.; Yang, X.; Ye, X.; Feng, Q.; Xu, Y.; Zhang, L.; Sun, W.; Dong, Y.; Meng, Q.; Li, T.; et al. Microwave ablation plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A multicenter, randomized, controlled, phase III clinical trial. Eur. Radiol. 2020, 30, 2692–2702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Li, X.; Zhao, M.; Wang, J.; Fan, W.; Li, W.; Pan, T.; Wu, P. Percutaneous CT-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation as Supplemental Therapy After Systemic Chemotherapy for Selected Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancers. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2013, 201, 1362–1367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Ni, Y.; Ye, X.; Yang, X.; Huang, G.; Li, W.; Wang, J.; Han, X.; Wei, Z.; Meng, M. Microwave ablation as local consolidative therapy for patients with extracranial oligometastatic EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer without progression after first-line EGFR-TKIs treatment. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2019, 146, 197–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Kodama, H.; Yamakado, K.; Takaki, H.; Kashima, M.; Uraki, J.; Nakatsuka, A.; Takao, M.; Taguchi, O.; Yamada, T.; Takeda, K. Lung radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of unresectable recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer after surgical intervention. Cardiovasc.-Tervent Radiol. 2012, 35, 563–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Schoellnast, H.; Deodhar, A.; Hsu, M.; Moskowitz, C.; Nehmeh, S.A.; Thornton, R.H.; Sofocleous, C.T.; Alago, W., Jr.; Downey, R.J.; Azzoli, C.G.; et al. Recurrent non-small cell lung cancer: Evaluation of CT-guided radiofrequency ablation as salvage therapy. Acta Radiol. 2012, 53, 893–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Cheng, M.; Fay, M.; Steinke, K. Percutaneous CT-guided thermal ablation as salvage therapy for recurrent non-small cell lung cancer after external beam radiotherapy: A retrospective study. Int. J. Hyperth. 2016, 32, 316–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Jiang, T.; Chu, Q.; Wang, H.; Zhou, F.; Gao, G.; Chen, X.; Li, X.; Zhao, C.; Xu, Q.; Li, W.; et al. EGFR-TKIs plus local therapy demonstrated survival benefit than EGFR-TKIs alone in EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients with oligometastatic or oligoprogressive liver metastases. Int. J. Cancer 2018, 144, 2605–2612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Zhao, Y.; Zhang, X.; Zhao, H.; Gong, T.; Li, J.; Tsauo, J.; Li, X. Systemic Therapy Plus Thermal Ablation Versus Systemic Therapy Alone for Oligometastatic Liver Metastases from Non-small Cell Lung Cancer. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol. 2020, 43, 1285–1293.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Tsao, M.N.; Cheung, P.; Poon, I.; Ung, Y.; Louie, A.V. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Extracranial Oligometastatic Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review. Clin. Lung Cancer 2020, 21, 95–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Tseng, S.-E.; Chiou, Y.-Y.; Lee, Y.-C.; Perng, R.-P.; Jacqueline, W.-P.; Chen, Y.-M. Number of liver metastatic nodules affects treatment options for pulmonary adenocarcinoma patients with liver metastases. Lung Cancer 2014, 86, 225–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Weickhardt, A.J.; Scheier, B.; Burke, J.M.; Gan, G.; Lu, X.; Bunn, P.A.; Aisner, D.L.; Gaspar, L.E.; Kavanagh, B.D.; Doebele, R.C.; et al. Local Ablative Therapy of Oligoprogressive Disease Prolongs Disease Control by Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Oncogene-Addicted Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2012, 7, 1807–1814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Ni, Y.; Liu, B.; Ye, X.; Fan, W.; Bi, J.; Yang, X.; Huang, G.; Li, W.; Wang, J.; Han, X.; et al. Local Thermal Ablation with Continuous EGFR Ty-rosine Kinase Inhibitors for EGFR-Mutant Non-small Cell Lung Cancers that Developed Extra-Central Nervous System (CNS) Oli-goprogressive Disease. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol 2019, 42, 693–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Olson, R.; Mathews, L.; Liu, M.; Schellenberg, D.; Mou, B.; Berrang, T.; Harrow, S.; Correa, R.J.M.; Bhat, V.; Pai, H.; et al. Stereotactic abla-tive radiotherapy for the comprehensive treatment of 1-3 Oligometastatic tumors (SABR-COMET-3): Study protocol for a randomized phase III trial. BMC Cancer 2020, 20, 380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Palma, D.A.; Olson, R.; Harrow, S.; Correa, R.J.M.; Schneiders, F.; Haasbeek, C.J.A.; Rodrigues, G.B.; Lock, M.; Yaremko, B.P.; Bauman, G.S.; et al. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for the comprehensive treatment of 4-10 oligometastatic tumors (SABR-COMET-10): Study pro-tocol for a randomized phase III trial. BMC Cancer 2019, 19, 816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  83. Lee, J.M.; Jin, G.Y.; Goldberg, S.N.; Lee, Y.C.; Chung, G.H.; Han, Y.M.; Lee, S.Y.; Kim, C.S. Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation for Inoperable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Metastases: Preliminary Report. Radiology 2004, 230, 125–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. McDevitt, J.L.; Mouli, S.K.; Nemcek, A.A.; Lewandowski, R.J.; Salem, R.; Sato, K.T. Percutaneous Cryoablation for the Treatment of Primary and Metastatic Lung Tumors: Identification of Risk Factors for Recurrence and Major Complications. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2016, 27, 1371–1379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Gillams, A.R.; Lees, W.R. Radiofrequency ablation of lung metastases: Factors influencing success. Eur. Radiol. 2007, 18, 672–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Yashiro, H.; Nakatsuka, S.; Inoue, M.; Kawamura, M.; Tsukada, N.; Asakura, K.; Yamauchi, Y.; Hashimoto, K.; Kuribayashi, S. Factors Affecting Local Progression after Percutaneous Cryoablation of Lung Tumors. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2013, 24, 813–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. De Baère, T.; Palussière, J.; Aupérin, A.; Hakime, A.; Abdel-Rehim, M.; Kind, M.; Dromain, C.; Ravaud, A.; Tebboune, N.; Boige, V.; et al. Midterm local efficacy and survival after radiofrequency ablation of lung tumors with minimum follow-up of 1 year: Prospective evaluation. Radiology 2006, 240, 587–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Venturini, M.; Cariati, M.; Marra, P.; Masala, S.; Pereira, P.L.; Carrafiello, G. CIRSE Standards of Practice on Thermal Ablation of Primary and Secondary Lung Tumours. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol. 2020, 43, 667–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Nelson, D.B.; Tam, A.L.; Mitchell, K.G.; Rice, D.C.; Mehran, R.J.; Sepesi, B.; Antonoff, M.B.; Vaporciyan, A.A.; Hofstetter, W.L. Local Recurrence After Microwave Ablation of Lung Malignancies: A Systematic Review. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2019, 107, 1876–1883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Aufranc, V.; Farouil, G.; Abdel-Rehim, M.; Smadja, P.; Tardieu, M.; Aptel, S.; Guibal, A. Percutaneous thermal ablation of primary and secondary lung tumors: Comparison between microwave and radiofrequency ablation. Diagn. Interv. Imaging 2019, 100, 781–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Yuan, Z.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, J.; Zheng, J.; Li, W. A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes After Radiofrequency Ablation and Microwave Ablation for Lung Cancer and Pulmonary Metastases. J. Am. Coll Radiol. 2019, 16, 302–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Facciorusso, A.; El Aziz, M.A.A.; Tartaglia, N.; Ramai, D.; Mohan, B.P.; Cotsoglou, C.; Pusceddu, S.; Giacomelli, L.; Ambrosi, A.; Sacco, R. Microwave Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Cancers 2020, 12, 3796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. De Baère, T.; Tselikas, L.; Woodrum, D.; Abtin, F.; Littrup, P.; Deschamps, F.; Suh, R.; Aoun, H.D.; Callstrom, M. Evaluating Cryoablation of Metastatic Lung Tumors in Patients—Safety and Efficacy: The ECLIPSE Trial--Interim Analysis at 1 Year. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2015, 10, 1468–1474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  94. De Baère, T. Pneumothorax and Lung Thermal Ablation: Is It a Complication? Is It Only About Tract Sealing? Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol 2021, 44, 911–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Zhou, J.; Chen, N.; Hai, Y.; Lyu, M.; Wang, Z.; Gao, Y.; Pang, L.; Liao, H.; Liu, L. External suction versus simple water-seal on chest drainage following pulmonary surgery: An updated meta-analysis. Interact. Cardiovasc. Thorac. Surg. 2018, 28, 29–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Palussière, J.; Catena, V.; Buy, X. Percutaneous thermal ablation of lung tumors—Radiofrequency, microwave and cryotherapy: Where are we going? Diagn. Interv. Imaging 2017, 98, 619–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Hasegawa, T.; Takaki, H.; Kodama, H.; Yamanaka, T.; Nakatsuka, A.; Sato, Y.; Takao, M.; Katayama, Y.; Fukai, I.; Kato, T.; et al. Three-year Survival Rate after Radiofrequency Ablation for Surgically Resectable Colorectal Lung Metastases: A Prospective Multicenter Study. Radiology 2020, 294, 686–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Chan, M.V.; Huo, Y.R.; Cao, C.; Ridley, L. Survival outcomes for surgical resection versus CT-guided percutaneous ablation for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. Radiol. 2021, 31, 5421–5433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Kwan, S.W.; Mortell, K.E.; Talenfeld, A.D.; Brunner, M.C. Thermal Ablation Matches Sublobar Resection Outcomes in Older Patients with Early-stage Non-small Cell Lung Cancer. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2014, 25, 1–9.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Zeng, C.; Lu, J.; Tian, Y.; Fu, X. Thermal Ablation Versus Wedge Resection for Stage I Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Based on the Eighth Edition of the TNM Classification: A Population Study of the US SEER Database. Front. Oncol. 2020, 10, 571684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Iguchi, T.; Hiraki, T.; Matsui, Y.; Mitsuhashi, T.; Katayama, N.; Katsui, K.; Soh, J.; Sakurai, J.; Gobara, H.; Toyooka, S.; et al. Survival Outcomes of Treatment with Radiofrequency Ablation, Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy, or Sublobar Resection for Patients with Clinical Stage I Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Single-Center Evaluation. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2020, 31, 1044–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Ager, B.J.; Wells, S.M.; Gruhl, J.D.; Stoddard, G.J.; Tao, R.; Kokeny, K.E.; Hitchcock, Y.J. Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus percutaneous local tumor ablation for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2019, 138, 6–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Kowalczyk, A.; Jassem, J. Multidisciplinary team care in advanced lung cancer. Transl. Lung Cancer Res. 2020, 9, 1690–1698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Najafi, A.; Baere, T.; Madani, K.; Al-Ahmar, M.; Roux, C.; Delpla, A.; Deschamps, F.; Tselikas, L. Lung Ablation—How I Do It. Tech. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2020, 23, 100673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Park, B.J.; Van Raemdonck, D.E.M.; Antonoff, M.B.; Detterbeck, F.C.; Lanuti, M.; Rimner, A.; Solomon, S.B. STS Summer Series: Pulmonary Metastasecto-My YouTube, Uploaded by ThoracicSurgeons, 31 July 2020. Available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8A2NklC9IA&feature=emb_logo2020 (accessed on 10 January 2021).
  106. Herbst, R.S.; Giaccone, G.; De Marinis, F.; Reinmuth, N.; Vergnenegre, A.; Barrios, C.H.; Morise, M.; Felip, E.; Andric, Z.; Geater, S.; et al. Atezolizumab for First-Line Treatment of PD-L1–Selected Patients with NSCLC. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 383, 1328–1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Horvath, L.; Thienpont, B.; Zhao, L.; Wolf, D.; Pircher, A. Overcoming immunotherapy resistance in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)—Novel approaches and future outlook. Mol. Cancer 2020, 19, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Slovak, R.; Ludwig, J.M.; Gettinger, S.N.; Herbst, R.S.; Kim, H.S. Immunothermal ablations—Boosting the anticancer immune response. J. Immunother. Cancer 2017, 5, 78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  109. Leppelmann, K.S.; Mooradian, M.J.; Ganguli, S.; Uppot, R.N.; Yamada, K.; Irani, Z.; Wehrenberg-Klee, E.P.; Zubiri, L.; Reynolds, K.L.; Arellano, R.S.; et al. Thermal Ablation, Embolization, and Selective Internal Radiation Therapy Combined with Checkpoint Inhibitor Cancer Immunotherapy: Safety Analysis. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2020, 32, 187–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Greten, T.F.; Mauda-Havakuk, M.; Heinrich, B.; Korangy, F.; Wood, B. Combined locoregional-immunotherapy for liver cancer. J. Hepatol. 2019, 70, 999–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Cancers 13 05202 g001 550
Figure 1. Example of MWA in a sixty-year-old woman with a 13 mm nodule in the apical segment of the left lower lobe. (A) Axial non-contrast chest computed tomography scan obtained during the MWA procedure shows the MWA probe (long arrow) placed percutaneously in the nodule (short arrow). (B) The computed tomography scan performed 6 weeks post-ablation shows a ground glass opacity (arrowheads) surrounding the nodule (short arrow) and corresponding to the ablation zone. In this case, technical success was confirmed with an ablation margin above 10mm. (C) Chest-computed tomography performed 13 months later confirmed the expected decrease in size post-ablation (short arrow). (D) Sixty-one months later, the post-ablation zone markedly decreased in size (short arrow), with no signs of local recurrence.
Figure 1. Example of MWA in a sixty-year-old woman with a 13 mm nodule in the apical segment of the left lower lobe. (A) Axial non-contrast chest computed tomography scan obtained during the MWA procedure shows the MWA probe (long arrow) placed percutaneously in the nodule (short arrow). (B) The computed tomography scan performed 6 weeks post-ablation shows a ground glass opacity (arrowheads) surrounding the nodule (short arrow) and corresponding to the ablation zone. In this case, technical success was confirmed with an ablation margin above 10mm. (C) Chest-computed tomography performed 13 months later confirmed the expected decrease in size post-ablation (short arrow). (D) Sixty-one months later, the post-ablation zone markedly decreased in size (short arrow), with no signs of local recurrence.
Cancers 13 05202 g001
Cancers 13 05202 g002 550
Figure 2. Proposed decision algorithm for local ablation therapy of oligometastatic non-small cell lung carcinoma.
Figure 2. Proposed decision algorithm for local ablation therapy of oligometastatic non-small cell lung carcinoma.
Cancers 13 05202 g002
Table
Table 1. Selected prospective studies evaluating thermal ablation for oligometastatic NSCLC patients.
Table 1. Selected prospective studies evaluating thermal ablation for oligometastatic NSCLC patients.
Ref (Year)Study DesignNoTASites Treated with TAIndication of TAMean Tumor Size (Range)Median FUP (mo)Median PFS (mo)Median OS (mo)
Lencioni (2008) [9]Single-arm, phase II106 (20 NSCLC with metastases or recurrence)RFA Lung
  • ≤3 tumors per lung
  • ≤3.5 cm
  • Patients not candidate for surgery, radiotherapy or chemotherapy
  • Recurrence after surgery or multiple lung metastases
22 mm * (7–30)--1 y and 2 y OS of 70% and 48% *
Arrieta (2019) [67]Single-arm, phase II37 (2 treated with TA)RFA-
  • ≤5 metastases (including CNS)
  • Synchronous
  • SD or PR after 4 cycles of chemotherapy or TKI
-32.523.5 **NR **
Bauml (2019) [68]Single-arm, phase II45 (1 treated with TA)--
  • ≤4 metastases
  • Previous LAT to all metastatic sites
  • Synchronous and metachronous
-2519.1 **41.6 **
Wei (2020) [69]Phase III RCT148 (MWA+ chemo group) vs. 145 (chemo only)MWALung
  • Stage IIIB or IV
  • Number of metastases not defined
  • TA performed on the primary tumor or the largest pulmonary metastases in case of previous surgery
36 mm (10–130)13.1 vs. 12.410.3 vs. 4.9NR vs. 12.4
* Results reported for all 33 NSCLC patients (13 patients with stage I and 20 patients with metastases or recurrence). ** Results reported with other LAT (radiotherapy and/or surgery). Abbreviations: Chemo = chemotherapy; CNS = central nervous system; FUP = follow-up; LAT = local ablative therapy; mo = months; MWA = microwave ablation; No = number of patients included in the study; NR = not reached; NSCLC = non-small cell lung carcinoma; OS = overall survival; PFS = progression-free survival; PR = partial response; RCT = randomized controlled trial; Ref = reference; RFA = radiofrequency ablation; SD = stable disease; TA = thermal ablation; TKI = tyrosine kinase inhibitor; 1 y = 1 year; 2 y = 2 year.
Table
Table 2. Selected retrospective studies evaluating thermal ablation for oligometastatic NSCLC patients.
Table 2. Selected retrospective studies evaluating thermal ablation for oligometastatic NSCLC patients.
Ref (Year)NoTASites Treated with TAIndication of TAMean Tumor Size (Range)Median FUPMedian PFSMedian OS
Bang, (2012) [55]31CryoLung, liver, superficial, paraaortic, adrenal, bone
  • <7 cm
  • ≤5 metastases per organ site
  • 84% treated with various chemotherapy and/or TKI regimens at some point before or after TA
31 mm (NA)Mean = 11 mo-15.9 mo, 1-y OS of 53%
Li (2013) [70]49RFALung
  • PR or SD after first line chemotherapy
  • ≤5.0 cm
  • ≤3 tumors
  • >1.0 cm away from hilum and major bronchi or vessels
29 mm (14–50)19 mo16 weeks14 mo
Ni (2020) [71]86 (34 treated with MWA)MWALung, liver, bone, adrenal gland, chest wall
  • Synchronous extra-cranial disease
  • No progression after EGFR-TKIs
  • ≤5 metastases
  • TA performed on primary tumors and oligometastatic lesions (consolidation) compared to patients receiving only TKI
29 mm (1–56)36 mo16.7 mo vs. 12.9 mo34.8 mo vs. 22.7 mo
Kodama (2012) [72]44RFALung
  • Post-surgical recurrence (initial stage I to IV) in ipsilateral (63.6%) or contralateral (36.4%) lung
  • Contra-indication to surgery
  • ≤5 metastases
  • No extrapulmonary metastases *
17 mm (6–40)Mean = 28.6 mo-1 y, 3 y, 5 y OS of 97.7%, 72.9%, 55.7%
Schoellnast (2012) [73]33RFALung
  • Recurrence following surgery, chemotherapy, and/or radiotherapy
  • Single lung lesion (except one patient with lung metastases)
28 mm (10–75)24 mo8 mo21 mo
Cheng (2016) [74]12RFA, MWALung
  • Local recurrence following radiotherapy (initial stage of disease: I to III) (in the radiation field)
  • Contra-indication to radiation or surgery
  • RFA was used for 2 patients and MWA for 10 patients
34 mm (17–61)Mean = 19 mo-35 mo
Jiang (2019) [75]64 OM (5 treated with TA)RFALiver
  • ≤5 liver metastases
  • ≤5 cm
  • LAT only on metastatic tumors
  • LAT with EGFR-TKI compared to EKFR-TKI monotherapy
--12.9 mo ** vs. 7.9 mo36.8 mo ** vs. 21.3 mo
Zhao (2020) [76]61 (21 treated with TA)RFA, MWALiver
  • ≤5 extracranial metastases
  • ≤3 liver metastases, ≤5 cm
  • After 4 cycles of chemotherapy or TKI
  • TA before or concurrently with systemic therapy, compared to systemic therapy alone
24.4 mm (NA)36.4 mo11.0 mo vs. 5.2 mo27.7 mo vs. 17.7 mo
* One patient had also liver and spleen metastases that were treated by RFA with curative intent. ** Results reported with other LAT (radiotherapy and surgery). Abbreviations: Cryo = Cryoablation; EGFR = epidermal growth factor receptor; FUP = follow-up; LAT = local ablative therapy; mo = months; MW A= microwave ablation; NA = not available; No = number of patients included in the study; NSCLC = non-small cell lung carcinoma; OM = oligometastatic; OS = overall survival; PFS = progression-free survival; PR = partial response; Ref = reference; RFA = radiofrequency ablation; SD= stable disease; TA = thermal ablation; TKI = tyrosine kinase inhibitor; 1 y = 1 year; 3 y = 3 year; 5 y = 5 year.
Table
Table 3. Selected studies evaluating thermal ablation for oligoprogressive NSCLC patients.
Table 3. Selected studies evaluating thermal ablation for oligoprogressive NSCLC patients.
Ref (Year)NoTASites Treated with TAIndication of TAMean Tumor Size (Range)Median PFS1 (mo)Median PFS2 (mo)Median OS (mo)PFS Definitions
Yu (2013) [7]18 (2 treated with TA)RFA Lung
  • <5 metastases (except one patient)
  • Progression on EGFR-TKI
  • RT and surgery also used to treat various sites of disease progression (lung, lymph node, adrenal gland)
-10 *22 *41 *
  • PFS1 = from local therapy to progression
  • PFS2 = from local therapy to change in systemic therapy
Jiang (2019) [75]71 OP (8 treated with TA)RFALiver
  • ≤5 liver metastases
  • ≤5 cm
  • LAT only on metastatic tumors
  • LAT with continuous EGFR-TKI compared to switching therapy
--13.9 * vs. 9.228.3 * vs. 17.1
  • PFS1 = from TKI to first progression or death
  • PFS2 = from TKI to off-TKI progression or switching therapy
Ni (2019) [80]71RFA, MWALung, liver, adrenal, pleura, lymph node
  • ≤3 metastases
  • Extra-cranial progression
  • ≤3 extra-CNS organs
  • TA for all progressive lesions with continued EGFR-TKI treatment
33 mm (10–105)11.810.026.4
  • PFS1 = from TKI to first progression
  • PFS2 = from first progression to second progression after TA
* Results reported with other local ablation therapies (radiotherapy and/or surgery). All selected studies were retrospective and did not report follow-up time. Abbreviations: EGFR = epidermal growth factor receptor; FUP = follow-up; mo = months; LAT = local ablative therapy; MWA = microwave ablation; No = number of patients included in the study; NSCLC = non-small cell lung carcinoma; OP = oligoprogressive; OS = overall survival; PFS = progression-free survival; Ref = reference; RFA = radiofrequency ablation; TA = thermal ablation; TKI = tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ghosn, M.; Solomon, S.B. Current Management of Oligometastatic Lung Cancer and Future Perspectives: Results of Thermal Ablation as a Local Ablative Therapy. Cancers 2021, 13, 5202. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13205202

AMA Style

Ghosn M, Solomon SB. Current Management of Oligometastatic Lung Cancer and Future Perspectives: Results of Thermal Ablation as a Local Ablative Therapy. Cancers. 2021; 13(20):5202. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13205202

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ghosn, Mario, and Stephen B. Solomon. 2021. "Current Management of Oligometastatic Lung Cancer and Future Perspectives: Results of Thermal Ablation as a Local Ablative Therapy" Cancers 13, no. 20: 5202. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13205202

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop