Comparison of Imaging Changes and Pain Responses in Patients with Intra- or Extraosseous Bone Metastases Treated Palliatively with Magnetic Resonance-Guided High-Intensity-Focused Ultrasound

Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound versus percutaneous thermal ablation in local control of bone oligometastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The percutaneous thermal ablation techniques (pTA) are radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation, and microwave ablation, suitable for the treatment of bone oligometastases. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) is a noninvasive ablation technique.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and safety of MRgFUS and pTA for treating bone oligometastases and their complications.

METHODS

Studies were selected with a PICO/PRISMA protocol: pTA or MRgFUS in patients with bone oligometastases; non-exclusive curative treatment. Exclusion criteria were: primary bone tumor; concurrent radiation therapy; palliative therapy; and absence of imaging at follow-up. PubMed, BioMed Central, and Scopus were searched. The modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessed articles quality. For each treatment (pTA and MRgFUS), we conducted two separate random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the pooled effectiveness and safety. The effectiveness was assessed by combining the proportions of treated lesions achieving local tumor control (LTC); the safety by combining the complications rates of treated patients. Meta-regression analyses were performed to identify any outcome predictor.

RESULTS

A total of 24 articles were included. Pooled LTC rate for MRgFUS was 84% (N = 7, 95% CI 66-97%, I2 = 74.7%) compared to 65% of pTA (N = 17, 95% CI 51-78%, I2 = 89.3%). Pooled complications rate was similar, respectively, 13% (95% CI 1-32%, I2 = 81.0%) for MRgFUS and 12% (95% CI 8-18%, I2 = 39.9%) for pTA, but major complications were recorded with pTA only. The meta-regression analyses, including technique type, study design, tumor, and follow-up, found no significant predictors.

DISCUSSION

The effectiveness and safety of the two techniques were found comparable, even though MRgFUS is a noninvasive treatment that did not cause any major complication. Limited data availability on MRgFUS and the lack of direct comparisons with pTA may affect these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

MRgFUS can be a valid, safe, and noninvasive treatment for bone oligometastases. Direct comparison studies are needed to confirm its promising benefits.

High Intensity Focused Ultrasound for Treatment of Bone Malignancies-20 Years of History

High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) is the only non-invasive method for percutaneous thermal ablation of tissue, with treatments typically performed either under magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound guidance. Since this method allows efficient heating of bony structures, it has found not only early use in treatment of bone pain, but also in local treatment of malignant bone tumors. This review of 20 years of published studies shows that HIFU is a very efficient method for rapid pain relief, can provide local tumor control and has a very patient-friendly safety profile.

Tissue specific considerations in implementing high intensity focussed ultrasound under magnetic resonance imaging guidance

High-intensity focused ultrasound can ablate a target permanently, leaving tissues through which it passes thermally unaffected. When delivered under magnetic resonance (MR) imaging guidance, the change in tissue relaxivity on heating is used to monitor the temperatures achieved. Different tissue types in the pre-focal beam path result in energy loss defined by their individual attenuation coefficients. Furthermore, at interfaces with different acoustic impedances the beam will be both reflected and refracted, changing the position of the focus. For complex interfaces this effect is exacerbated. Moreover, blood vessels proximal to the focal region can dissipate heat, altering the expected region of damage. In the target volume, the temperature distribution depends on the thermal conductivity (or diffusivity) of the tissue and its heat capacity. These are different for vascular tissues, water and fat containing tissues and bone. Therefore, documenting the characteristics of the pre-focal and target tissues is critical for effective delivery of HIFU. MR imaging provides excellent anatomic detail and characterization of soft tissue components. It is an ideal modality for real-time planning and monitoring of HIFU ablation, and provides non-invasive temperature maps. Clinical applications involve soft-tissue (abdomino-pelvic applications) or bone (brain applications) pre-focally and at the target (soft-tissue tumors and bone metastases respectively). This article addresses the technical difficulties of delivering HIFU effectively when vascular tissues, densely cellular tissues, fat or bone are traversed pre-focally, and the clinical applications that target these tissues. The strengths and limitations of MR techniques used for monitoring ablation in these tissues are also discussed.

Interventional Radiology in the Management of Metastases and Bone Tumors

Interventional Radiology (IR) has experienced an exponential growth in recent years. Technological advances of the last decades have made it possible to use new treatments on a larger scale, with good results in terms of safety and effectiveness. In musculoskeletal field, painful bone metastases are the most common target of IR palliative treatments; however, in selected cases of bone metastases, IR may play a curative role, also in combination with other techniques (surgery, radiation and oncology therapies, etc.). Primary malignant bone tumors are extremely rare compared with secondary bone lesions: osteosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, and chondrosarcoma are the most common; however, the role of interventional radiology in this fiels is marginal. In this review, the main techniques used in interventional radiology were examined, and advantages and limitations illustrated. Techniques of ablation (Radiofrequency, Microwaves, Cryoablation as also magnetic resonance imaging-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound), embolization, and Cementoplasty will be described. The techniques of ablation work by destruction of pathological tissue by thermal energy (by an increase of temperature up to 90 °C with the exception of the Cryoablation that works by freezing the tissue up to -40 °C). Embolization creates an ischemic necrosis by the occlusion of the arterial vessels that feed the tumor. Finally, cementoplasty has the aim of strengthening bone segment weakened by the growth of pathological tissue through the injection of cement. The results of the treatments performed so far were also assessed and presented focused the attention on the management of bone metastasis.

Efficacy and safety of magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound for the treatment of painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To report the safety and efficacy of magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) in the treatment of painful bone metastases through a systematic review and meta-analysis of pain scores before and after MRgFUS treatment and post-treatment adverse events.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of PubMed and Embase databases was performed for studies evaluating the efficacy and/or safety of MRgFUS. The mean difference of pain scores (10-point visual analogue scale or numerical rating scale) between baseline and 1-month/3-month pain scores was collected and analyzed in a pooled meta-analysis. Post-treatment adverse events based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grading were recorded and the pooled prevalence was calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies published between 2007 and 2019 were collected, resulting in a total sample size of 1082 patients. The majority of the studies were prospective with a reported follow-up period of 3 months. The pooled proportion of patients that achieved pain relief from MRgFUS (complete response or partial response [≥ 2-point improvement of pain score]) was 79% (95% CI 73-83%). The pooled 1-month and 3-month mean difference in pain score were - 3.8 (95% CI - 4.3; - 3.3) and - 4.4 (95% CI - 5.0; - 3.7), respectively. The overall rate of high-grade (CTCAE grade 3 or higher) and low-grade (CTCAE grade 2 or lower) MRgFUS-related adverse events were 0.9% and 5.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

MRgFUS is an effective procedure that is able to provide significant pain palliation for patients with symptomatic bone metastases with a favorable safety profile.

HIFU for the treatment of difficult colorectal liver metastases with unsuitable indications for resection and radiofrequency ablation: a phase I clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The goal of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) but were contraindicated for resection and radiofrequency ablation.

METHODS

Patients between 20 and 80 years of age with 1-3 liver metastases from colorectal cancer were selected. Included patients have had their primary lesions removed with no evidence of extrahepatic metastasis prior to the study. Ultrasound-guided HIFU was employed and target regions' ablation was achieved with repeated sonications from the deep to shallow regions of the tumors section by section.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients were enrolled. The most common adverse events (AEs) were pain (n = 8), followed by fatigue (n = 7), increased aspartate aminotransferase (AST) (n = 7), increased alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (n = 5), and skin edema (n = 4). No grade ≥ 3 AEs occurred and while most patients (76.9%) achieved a complete response, three patients achieved a partial response. The objective response rate was 100% after the first HIFU treatment. Nine patients relapsed but the tumors were mostly isolated to the liver (8/9). The median follow-up period was 25 months. The 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 16.7%, and the median PFS was 9 months. Notably, the 2-year overall survival (OS) was 77.8%, and the median OS was 25 months.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that the HIFU treatment is safe, is able to achieve a good tumor response rate and long-term prognosis even when the foci were in high-risk locations, and should be considered for patients who were considered unsuitable for other local treatments.

Prediction of pelvic tumour coverage by magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU) from referral imaging

BACKGROUND

Patient suitability for magnetic resonance-guided high intensity focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU) ablation of pelvic tumors is initially evaluated clinically for treatment feasibility using referral images, acquired using standard supine diagnostic imaging, followed by MR screening of potential patients lying on the MRgHIFU couch in a 'best-guess' treatment position. Existing evaluation methods result in ≥40% of referred patients being screened out because of tumor non-targetability. We hypothesize that this process could be improved by development of a novel algorithm for predicting tumor coverage from referral imaging.

METHODS

The algorithm was developed from volunteer images and tested with patient data. MR images were acquired for five healthy volunteers and five patients with recurrent gynaecological cancer. Subjects were MR imaged supine and in oblique-supine-decubitus MRgHIFU treatment positions. Body outline and bones were segmented for all subjects, with organs-at-risk and tumors also segmented for patients. Supine images were aligned with treatment images to simulate a treatment dataset. Target coverage (of patient tumors and volunteer intra-pelvic soft tissue), i.e. the volume reachable by the MRgHIFU focus, was quantified. Target coverage predicted from supine imaging was compared to that from treatment imaging.

RESULTS

Mean (±standard deviation) absolute difference between supine-predicted and treatment-predicted coverage for 5 volunteers was 9 ± 6% (range: 2-22%) and for 4 patients, was 12 ± 7% (range: 4-21%), excluding a patient with poor acoustic coupling (coverage difference was 53%).

CONCLUSION

Prediction of MRgHIFU target coverage from referral imaging appears feasible, facilitating further development of automated evaluation of patient suitability for MRgHIFU.