Comparative Assessment of the Safety and Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Ablation Among Elderly Medicare Beneficiaries with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

• Published in: Annals of surgical oncology Vol. 19; no. 4; pp. 1058 - 1065
• Main Authors: Massarweh, Nader N., Park, James O., Yeung, Raymond S. W., Flum, David R.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York Springer-Verlag 01.04.2012; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - mortality; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - surgery; Catheter Ablation - adverse effects; Catheter Ablation - utilization; Cohort Studies; Female; Healthcare Policy and Outcomes; Humans; Liver Neoplasms - mortality; Liver Neoplasms - surgery; Male; Medicare - statistics & numerical data; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Multivariate Analysis; Oncology; Patient Readmission - statistics & numerical data; Regression Analysis; Risk Assessment; Surgery; Surgical Oncology; Survival Rate; United States - epidemiology; United States; Propensity Score; Milan Criterion; General Community; Charlson Score; Comorbid Illness
• ISSN: 1068-9265; 1534-4681
• DOI: 10.1245/s10434-011-2067-7

Background Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) use among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has increased dramatically over the last decade, but assessments outside specialized centers are lacking. This population-based study was intended to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of RFA when used to treat HCC. Methods A cohort study of HCC patients (diagnosed 2002–2005) was performed using linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data. Early (≤90-day) mortality and readmission as well as survival among patients undergoing RFA, resection, or no treatment were compared using multivariate and propensity score adjusted Poisson and Cox regression models. Results Of 2631 patients (mean age 76.1 ± 6.1 years, 65.9% male), 16% underwent RFA (49.6%) or resection (50.4%). Early mortality (13.6 vs. 18.7%, P  = .16) and readmission (34.5 vs. 32.1%, P  = .60) rates were similar among RFA and resection patients. The 1-year survival after RFA and resection was similar (72.2 vs. 79.7%, P  = .18), but beyond 3 years there was a survival benefit among patients undergoing resection (39.2 vs. 58.0%, P  < .001). Patients treated with RFA as a sole therapeutic intervention in the 1st year had a similar hazard of death compared with untreated patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0.84, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.54–1.33). Conclusions In the general community, patients treated with RFA have a similar risk of early adverse events compared with those treated with resection with no clear survival benefit when used as a sole intervention. Although RFA has been described as a safe and effective treatment for HCC at specialized centers, this experience may not extrapolate to the general community and requires further evaluation.