Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: evaluation of two kinds of dosages of anticancer drugs and analysis of prognostic factors.
ABSTRACT To evaluate the efficacy of TACE (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization) with use of low-dose versus conventional-dose anticancer drugs in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with cirrhosis and to analyze their prognostic factors.
Eight-two patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma underwent super-selective TACE. Patients in group A (n = 40) received low-dose anticancer drugs. Patients in group B (n = 42) were given conventional-dose of anticancer drugs. Tumor response and survival time in the two groups were compared. Cox proportion-hazards modeling was used to evaluate the relative importance of prognostic variables.
There was no significant difference between the two groups in initial tumor response (P < 0.05). The median survival in all patients was 18 months (mo). The median survival in groups A and B were 20 mo and 16 mo respectively. The cumulative survival rates at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 mo were 68.4%, 57.6%, 38.4%, 26.6%, 19.9% in group A, and 62.6%, 43.8%, 31.9%, 26.5%, 26.5% in group B. There was no significant difference in survival between the two groups (P > 0.05). The factors influencing prognosis were Child-Pugh scores (P < 0.0001), tumor thrombus in the portal vein (P < 0.0001), tumor size (P < 0.0001), method of embolization (P < 0.0001), TACE times (P < 0.001). The dosage of anticancer drugs employed in TACE was not relevant to the survival rates (P = 0.883).
TACE with use of large-dose anticancer drugs does not significantly enhance the anticancer effects and survival compared that with lowdose anticancer drugs. The therapeutic effect of TACE was mainly attributed to embolization of the artery rather than to anticancer drugs.
SourceAvailable from: Emmanuel A Tsochatzis[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Transarterial therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma are considered palliative and should be offered to patients with intermediate stage multinodular disease without extra-hepatic metastases and sufficient liver reserve. They mainly include transarterial chemoembolisation and transarterial embolisation. While transarterial therapy is now a validated treatment for unresectable HCC, there is still a lack of conclusive evidence as to which type and schedule is the optimal procedure. This is mainly due to the lack of standardisation. Combining local therapies or intra-arterial therapies with systemic targeted therapies might prove more effective strategies in the future. In the present article, we review transarterial therapies and critically comment on their indications, complications and outcomes.Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progrès dans les recherches sur le cancer 01/2013; 190:195-206. DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-16037-0_13
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy and safety of: 1) transarterial chemolipiodolization with gelatin sponge embolization vs chemolipiodolization without embolization, and 2) chemolipiodolization with triple chemotherapeutic agents vs epirubicin alone.MethodsA single-blind, three parallel arm, randomized trial was conducted at three clinical centers with patients with biopsy-confirmed unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Arm 1 received triple-drug chemolipiodolization and sponge embolization, whereas Arm 2 received triple-drug chemolipiodolization only. Patients in arm 3 were treated with single-drug chemolipiodolization and sponge embolization. We compared overall survival and time to progression. Event-time distributions were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. All statistical tests were two-sided.ResultsFrom July 2007 to November 2009, 365 patients (Arm 1: n = 122; Arm 2: n = 121; Arm 3: n = 122) were recruited. The median tumor size was 10.9cm (range = 7-22cm), and 34.5% had macrovascular invasion. The median survivals and time to progression in Arm 1, Arm 2, and Arm 3 were 10.5 and 3.6 months, 10.1 and 3.1 months, and 5.9 and 3.1 months, respectively. Survival was statistically significantly better in Arm 1 than in Arm 3 (P < .001), whereas there was no statistically significant difference between Arm 1 and Arm 2 (P = .20). Objective response rates were 45.9%, 29.7%, and 18.9% for Arm 1, Arm 2, and Arm 3, respectively.Conclusions Chemolipiodolization played an important role in transarterial chemoembolization, and the choice of chemotherapy regimen may largely affect survival outcomes. However, the removal of embolization from chemoembolization might not statistically significantly decrease survival.CancerSpectrum Knowledge Environment 11/2012; DOI:10.1093/jnci/djs464 · 14.07 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the first line treatment for patients with intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma but is also increasingly being used for patients on the transplant waiting list to prevent further tumor growth. Despite its widespread use, TACE remains an unstandardized procedure, with variation in type and size of embolizing particles, type and dose of chemotherapy and interval between therapies. Existing evidence from randomized controlled trials suggest that bland transarterial embolization (TAE) has the same efficacy with TACE. In the current article, we review the use of TACE and TAE for hepatocellular carcinoma and we focus on the evidence for their use.World Journal of Gastroenterology 03/2014; 20(12):3069-3077. DOI:10.3748/wjg.v20.i12.3069 · 2.43 Impact Factor