Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Safety, efficacy, and survival of different transarterial chemoembolization techniques in the management of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparative single-center analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) has become the standard of care for the treatment of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, current clinical practice guidelines lack consensus on the best selection of a specific TACE technique. This study aims to compare safety, tumor response, and progression-free survival (PFS) of conventional TACE (cTACE), drug-eluting bead TACE (DEB-TACE), and degradable starch microsphere TACE (DSM-TACE).

          Methods

          This retrospective study included = 192 patients with HCC who underwent first TACE with unbiased follow-up at 4–6 weeks at our center between 2008 and 2021. Eligibility for TACE was BCLC intermediate stage B, bridging/down-staging (B/D) to liver transplantation (LT), or any other stage when patients were not suitable for resection, LT, local ablation, or systemic therapy. Patients were grouped into three cohorts ( = 45 cTACE, = 84 DEB-TACE, = 63 DSM-TACE), and further categorized by TACE indication (B/D or palliative). Liver function and adverse events, response assessed by the modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (mRECIST) 4–6 weeks post-TACE and PFS were analyzed.

          Results

          There were no significant differences in age, gender distribution, BCLC stage, or etiology of liver disease among the three TACE groups, even in the B/D or palliative subgroups. DEB-TACE induced slight increases in bilirubin in the palliative subgroup and in lactate dehydrogenase in the entire cohort 4–6 weeks post-TACE, and more adverse events in the palliative subgroup. DEB-TACE and DSM-TACE showed significantly higher disease control rates (complete and partial response, stable disease) compared to cTACE, especially in the B/D setting ( p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in PFS between the groups [median PFS (months): cTACE, 10.0 vs. DEB, 7.0 vs. DSM, 10.0; p = 0.436].

          Conclusion

          Our study provides valuable perspectives in the decision-making for a specific TACE technique: DEB-TACE and DSM-TACE showed improved tumor response. DEB-TACE showed a prolonged impact on liver function and more side effects, so patients with impaired liver function should be more strictly selected, especially in the palliative subgroup.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: 2018 Practice Guidance by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma.

            The endpoint in cancer research is overall survival. Nonetheless, other potential surrogate endpoints, such as response rate and time to progression, are currently used. Measurement of response rate in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has become a controversial issue. The World Health Organization (WHO) criteria underestimate the actual response rate; thus, they were amended in 2000 by a panel of experts convened by the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) to take into account treatment-induced tumor necrosis. Applying these guidelines, there was an association between response rate and outcome prediction. More recently, the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guideline was proposed as a method for measuring treatment response based on tumor shrinkage, which is a valuable measure of antitumor activity of cytotoxic drugs. This method was initially adopted by regulatory agencies, such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for drug approval. However, anatomic tumor response metrics can be misleading when applied to molecular-targeted therapies or locoregional therapies in HCC. In 2008, a group of experts convened by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) developed a set of guidelines aimed at providing a common framework for the design of clinical trials in HCC and adapted the concept of viable tumor-tumoral tissue showing uptake in arterial phase of contrast-enhanced radiologic imaging techniques-to formally amend RECIST. These amendments conformed the AASLD-JNCI (Journal of the National Cancer Institute) guidelines and are summarized and clarified in the current article. They are referred to herein as the modified RECIST assessment (mRECIST). Further studies are needed to confirm the accuracy of this measurement compared with conventional gold standards such as pathologic studies of explanted livers.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system. The 2022 update

              There have been major advances in the armamentarium for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since the last official update of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer prognosis and treatment strategy published in 2018. Whilst there have been advances in all areas, we will focus on those that have led to a change in strategy and we will discuss why, despite being encouraging, data for select interventions are still too immature for them to be incorporated into an evidence-based model for clinicians and researchers. Finally, we describe the critical insight and expert knowledge that are required to make clinical decisions for individual patients, considering all of the parameters that must be considered to deliver personalised clinical management.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Philipp.Schindler@ukmuenster.de
                Journal
                J Cancer Res Clin Oncol
                J Cancer Res Clin Oncol
                Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                0171-5216
                1432-1335
                6 May 2024
                6 May 2024
                2024
                : 150
                : 5
                : 235
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Clinic for Radiology, University of Münster, ( https://ror.org/00pd74e08) Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, 48149 Münster, Germany
                [2 ]Department of Internal Medicine B, University of Münster, ( https://ror.org/00pd74e08) Münster, Germany
                [3 ]Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Münster, ( https://ror.org/00pd74e08) Münster, Germany
                [4 ]GRID grid.5252.0, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 973X, Department of Radiology, , LMU Munich, ; Munich, Germany
                Article
                5722
                10.1007/s00432-024-05722-5
                11074216
                38710956
                ff4e4fed-582b-46d9-b236-b5629e23f9a2
                © The Author(s) 2024

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 9 January 2024
                : 22 March 2024
                Funding
                Funded by: Universität Münster (1056)
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                tace,deb-tace,dsm-tace,ctace,hcc
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                tace, deb-tace, dsm-tace, ctace, hcc

                Comments

                Comment on this article