https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5239-6877
![Sample our Bioscience journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5925/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Bioscience.jpg"})
Abstract
The present meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. A systematic literature search was conducted of online databases prior to February 21, 2021. Eleven articles involving 8429 patients were included. The pooled hazard ratio for overall survival (OS) of RFA versus SBRT was 0.79 (p < 0.001). Statistically significant differences were found in the 1-, 2-, 3-, 4- and 5-year pooled OS and freedom from local progression (FFLP) rates between the two groups, favoring the RFA arms. However, the pooled local control (LC) rates were higher in the SBRT arm. RFA provided better OS and FFLP for treating HCC, while SBRT achieved superior LC.
PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020207877.
Lay abstract
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) are two common nonsurgical methods for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma patients. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of the two methods. The analysis included 11 original studies after online databases search prior to 21 February 2021. The results showed that RFA provided better survival benefits and less local disease progression for the treatment of HCC patients, while SBRT obtained superior local control of tumor tissues.
Author contributions
H Zhang and N Chang designed and conducted the research and wrote the paper; T Han, S Ma, G Qu and H Liu collected and analyzed the data; C Sun, C Cheng and Q Zhou contributed to the interpretation of data and paper modification; Y Sun revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Financial & competing interests disclosure
The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.
No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.