Microwave ablation for primary or metastatic cancer in the lung
Closed for comments This consultation ended on at Request commenting lead permission
3 Committee considerations
The evidence
3.1 NICE did a rapid review of the published literature on the efficacy and safety of this procedure. This comprised a comprehensive literature search and detailed review of the evidence from 10 sources, which was discussed by the committee. The evidence included 3 systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, 4 non-randomised comparative studies, 2 case series and 1 review of lung microwave ablation database. It is presented in the summary of key evidence section in the interventional procedures overview. Other relevant literature is in the appendix of the overview.
3.2 The professional experts and the committee considered the key efficacy outcomes to be: disease progression, survival, reduction in tumour size and quality of life.
3.3 The professional experts and the committee considered the key safety outcomes to be: pneumothorax, pleural effusion, air embolism and bleeding.
3.4 Patient commentary was sought but none was received.
Committee comments
3.5 Clinical experts explained that microwave ablation is quicker and may be better tolerated than other ablation techniques.
3.6 Evidence on the efficacy of microwave ablation for primary and metastatic lung cancer is similar to other ablation procedures in terms of tumour size reduction.
3.7 Clinical experts explained that microwave ablation is not used to treat small-cell lung cancer.
3.8 This procedure may have a role for patients with primary or metastatic lung cancer who are unable to have surgery or whose tumour is not resectable.
3.9 There is more than one device available for this procedure.
Tom Clutton-Brock
Chair, interventional procedures advisory committee
September 2021
ISBN:
How are you taking part in this consultation?
You will not be able to change how you comment later.
You must be signed in to answer questions