Resectability and Ablatability Criteria for the Treatment of Liver Only Colorectal Metastases:Multidisciplinary Consensus Document from the COLLISION Trial Group

The guidelines for metastatic colorectal cancer crudely state that the best local treatment should be selected from a 'toolbox' of techniques according to patient- and treatment-related factors. We created an interdisciplinary, consensus-based algorithm with specific resectability and ablatability criteria for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). To pursue consensus, members of the multidisciplinary COLLISION and COLDFIRE trial expert panel employed the RAND appropriateness method (RAM). Statements regarding patient, disease, tumor and treatment characteristics were categorized as appropriate, equipoise or inappropriate. Patients with ECOG≤2, ASA≤3 and Charlson comorbidity index ≤8 should be considered fit for curative-intent local therapy. When easily resectable and/or ablatable (stage IVa), (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy is not indicated. When requiring major hepatectomy (stage IVb), neo-adjuvant systemic therapy is appropriate for early metachronous disease and to reduce procedural risk. To downstage patients (stage IVc), downsizing induction systemic therapy and/or future remnant augmentation is advised. Disease can only be deemed permanently unsuitable for local therapy if downstaging failed (stage IVd). Liver resection remains the gold standard. Thermal ablation is reserved for unresectable CRLM, deep-seated resectable CRLM and can be considered when patients are in poor health. Irreversible electroporation and stereotactic body radiotherapy can be considered for unresectable perihilar and perivascular CRLM 0-5cm. This consensus document provides per-patient and per-tumor resectability and ablatability criteria for the treatment of CRLM. These criteria are intended to aid tumor board discussions, improve consistency when designing prospective trials and advance intersociety communications. Areas where consensus is lacking warrant future comparative studies.</p

Viable Tumor Tissue Adherent to Needle Applicators after Local Ablation: A Risk Factor for Local Tumor Progression

Background. Local tumor progression (LTP) is a serious complication after local ablation of malignant liver tumors, negatively influencing patient survival. LTP may be the result of incomplete ablation of the treated tumor. In this study, we determined whether viable tumor cells attached to the needle applicator after ablation was associated with LTP and disease-free survival. Methods. In this prospective study, tissue was collected of 96 consecutive patients who underwent local liver ablations for 130 liver malignancies. Cells and tissue attached to the needle applicators were analyzed for viability using glucose-6-phosphate-dehydrogenase staining and autofluorescence intensity levels of H&E stained sections. Patients were followed-up until disease progression. Results. Viable tumor cells were found on the needle applicators after local ablation in 26.7% of patients. The type of needle applicator used, an open approach, and the omission of track ablation were significantly correlated with viable tumor tissue adherent to the needle applicator. The presence of viable cells was an independent predictor of LTP. The attachment of viable cells to the needle applicators was associated with a shorter time to LTP. Conclusions. Viable tumor cells adherent to the needle applicators were found after ablation of 26.7% of patients. An independent risk factor for viable cells adherent to the needle applicators is the omission of track ablation. We recommend using only RFA devices that have track ablation functionality. Adherence of viable tumor cells to the needle applicator after local ablation was an independent risk factor for LT

Colorectal liver metastases: Surgery versus thermal ablation (COLLISION) - a phase III single-blind prospective randomized controlled trial

Background: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) are widely accepted techniques to eliminate small unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Although previous studies labelled thermal ablation inferior to surgical resection, the apparent selection bias when comparing patients with unresectable disease to surgical candidates, the superior safety profile, and the competitive overall survival results for the more recent reports mandate the setup of a randomized controlled trial. The objective of the COLLISION trial is to prove non-inferiority of thermal ablation compared to hepatic resection in patients with at least one resectable and ablatable CRLM and no extrahepatic disease. Methods: In this two-arm, single-blind multi-center phase-III clinical trial, six hundred and eighteen patients with at least one CRLM (≤3cm) will be included to undergo either surgical resection or thermal ablation of appointed target lesion(s) (≤3cm). Primary endpoint is OS (overall survival, intention-to-treat analysis). Main secondary endpoints are overall disease-free survival (DFS), time to progression (TTP), time to local progression (TTLP), primary and assisted technique efficacy (PTE, ATE), procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay, assessment of pain and quality of life (QoL), cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Discussion: If thermal ablation proves to be non-inferior in treating lesions ≤3cm, a switch in treatment-method may lead to a reduction of the post-procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay and incremental costs without compromising oncological outcome for patients with CRLM. Trial registration:NCT03088150 , January 11th 2017

Irreversible Electroporation for Colorectal Liver Metastases

Image-guided tumor ablation techniques have significantly broadened the treatment possibilities for primary and secondary hepatic malignancies. A new ablation technique, irreversible electroporation (IRE), was recently added to the treatment armamentarium. As opposed to thermal ablation, cell death with IRE is primarily induced using electrical energy: electrical pulses disrupt the cellular membrane integrity, resulting in cell death while sparing the extracellular matrix of sensitive structures such as the bile ducts, blood vessels, and bowel wall. The preservation of these structures makes IRE attractive for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) that are unsuitable for resection and thermal ablation owing to their anatomical location. This review discusses different technical and practical issues of IRE for CRLM: the indications, patient preparations, procedural steps, and different "tricks of the trade" used to improve safety and efficacy of IRE. Imaging characteristics and early efficacy results are presented. Much is still unknown about the exact mechanism of cell death and about factors playing a crucial role in the extent of cell death. At this time, IRE for CRLM should only be reserved for small tumors that are truly unsuitable for resection or thermal ablation because of abutment of the portal triad or the venous pedicle

MWA Versus RFA for Perivascular and Peribiliary CRLM: A Retrospective Patient- and Lesion-Based Analysis of Two Historical Cohorts

PURPOSE: To retrospectively analyse the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus microwave ablation (MWA) in the treatment of unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) in proximity to large vessels and/or major bile ducts. METHOD AND MATERIALS: A database search was performed to include patients with unresectable histologically proven and/or (18)F–FDG–PET avid CRLM who were treated with RFA or MWA between January 2001 and September 2014 in a single centre. All lesions that were considered to have a peribiliary and/or perivascular location were included. Univariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the distribution of patient, tumour and procedure characteristics. Multivariate logistic regression was used to correct for potential confounders. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-three patients with 774 unresectable CRLM were ablated. One hundred and twenty-two patients (78 males; 44 females) had at least one perivascular or peribiliary lesion (n = 199). Primary efficacy rate of RFA was superior to MWA after 3 and 12 months of follow-up (P = 0.010 and P = 0.022); however, after multivariate analysis this difference was non-significant at 12 months (P = 0.078) and vanished after repeat ablations (P = 0.39). More CTCAE grade III complications occurred after MWA versus RFA (18.8 vs. 7.9 %; P = 0.094); biliary complications were especially common after peribiliary MWA (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: For perivascular CRLM, RFA and MWA are both safe treatment options that appear equally effective. For peribiliary CRLM, MWA has a higher complication rate than RFA, with similar efficacy. Based on these results, it is advised to use RFA for lesions in the proximity of major bile ducts

Percutaneous Liver Tumour Ablation: Image Guidance, Endpoint Assessment, and Quality Control

Liver tumour ablation nowadays represents a routine treatment option for patients with primary and secondary liver tumours. Radiofrequency ablation and microwave ablation are the most widely adopted methods, although novel techniques, such as irreversible electroporation, are quickly working their way up. The percutaneous approach is rapidly gaining popularity because of its minimally invasive character, low complication rate, good efficacy rate, and repeatability. However, matched to partial hepatectomy and open ablations, the issue of ablation site recurrences remains unresolved and necessitates further improvement. For percutaneous liver tumour ablation, several real-time imaging modalities are available to improve tumour visibility, detect surrounding critical structures, guide applicators, monitor treatment effect, and, if necessary, adapt or repeat energy delivery. Known predictors for success are tumour size, location, lesion conspicuity, tumour-free margin, and operator experience. The implementation of reliable endpoints to assess treatment efficacy allows for completion-procedures, either within the same session or within a couple of weeks after the procedure. Although the effect on overall survival may be trivial, (local) progression-free survival will indisputably improve with the implementation of reliable endpoints. This article reviews the available needle navigation techniques, evaluates potential treatment endpoints, and proposes an algorithm for quality control after the procedure