In a patient who underwent cryoablation for early NSCLC, is there a role for giving preemptive further local therapy?

E.g. would you consider cryo inadequate upfront therapy and recommend SBRT? Or would you do surveillance and only intervene in case of local progression?

Answer from: Radiation Oncologist at Academic Institution

Hi @Matthew. It's a good question and speaks to some of the ambiguity in the space we work. The interventional physicians are giving a therapy they present as being equivalent to other established options (like surgery or SBRT) but it doesn't have the same depth of research and history. It deserves ...

Comments

Radiation Oncologist at UCLA | VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System
The acute radiographic abnormalities following per...

Radiation Oncologist at Mallory Radiotherapy, PLLC
So we're 2 months out from cyro and the diameter o...

Answer from: Radiation Oncologist at Community Practice

I wouldn't treat them until they recur. If there's morbidity, it's because you treated them. If there's no recurrence, it's because the cryo worked. It makes more sense to wait until progression and treat at that time when you have a solid justification for treating the patient.

Please select the option that best describes you:

In a patient who underwent cryoablation for early NSCLC, is there a role for giving preemptive further local therapy?

Related Questions