Local Efficacy and Safety of Transarterial Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Epirubicin-Loaded DC Beads vs. Epirubicin-Lipiodol Emulsion with Gelatin Sponge (cTACE).

Yusuke Ono, Keigo Osuga, Keisuke Nagai, Hidenari Hongyo, Yasushi Kimura, Kaisyu Tanaka, Hiroki Higashihara, Noriyuki Tomiyama
{"title":"Local Efficacy and Safety of Transarterial Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Epirubicin-Loaded DC Beads vs. Epirubicin-Lipiodol Emulsion with Gelatin Sponge (cTACE).","authors":"Yusuke Ono,&nbsp;Keigo Osuga,&nbsp;Keisuke Nagai,&nbsp;Hidenari Hongyo,&nbsp;Yasushi Kimura,&nbsp;Kaisyu Tanaka,&nbsp;Hiroki Higashihara,&nbsp;Noriyuki Tomiyama","doi":"10.22575/interventionalradiology.2020-0025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the efficacy and safety between epirubicin-loaded DC Beads (DCB-TACE) and conventional TACE (cTACE) used in transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective study enrolled 64 patients (mean age, 73.3 years; 44 men, 20 women) who underwent initial DCB-TACE between 2014 and 2015, and 66 patients (mean age, 71.3 years; 38 men, 28 women) who underwent initial cTACE between 2011 and 2013 as historical controls. Treatment effects on the target lesions at 3 months after TACE, the period until re-treatment of the target lesion, and adverse events after TACE were compared between the groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were also performed to estimate the factors influencing the treatment effects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Based on the Response Evaluation Criteria in Cancer of the Liver version 2015, treatment response of the target lesions equivalent to a complete response and termed as TE4, was 51.0% (53/104) in the DCB-TACE group and 74.4% (64/86) in the cTACE group (p<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that the TACE procedure, Child-Pugh score, serum aspartate aminotransferase (AST) level, alpha fetoprotein level, and tumor size were independent significant predictors of TE4. The frequencies of elevated serum AST and alanine transaminase levels after TACE were significantly lower in patients in the DCB-TACE group (p<0.001 each). No significant difference in biliary/liver damage was evident between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The local efficacy of cTACE was higher than that of DCB-TACE. Adverse events were milder after DCB-TACE than after cTACE.</p>","PeriodicalId":73503,"journal":{"name":"Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan)","volume":"6 1","pages":"14-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/da/5b/2432-0935-6-1-0014.PMC9327354.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22575/interventionalradiology.2020-0025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety between epirubicin-loaded DC Beads (DCB-TACE) and conventional TACE (cTACE) used in transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Materials and methods: This retrospective study enrolled 64 patients (mean age, 73.3 years; 44 men, 20 women) who underwent initial DCB-TACE between 2014 and 2015, and 66 patients (mean age, 71.3 years; 38 men, 28 women) who underwent initial cTACE between 2011 and 2013 as historical controls. Treatment effects on the target lesions at 3 months after TACE, the period until re-treatment of the target lesion, and adverse events after TACE were compared between the groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were also performed to estimate the factors influencing the treatment effects.

Results: Based on the Response Evaluation Criteria in Cancer of the Liver version 2015, treatment response of the target lesions equivalent to a complete response and termed as TE4, was 51.0% (53/104) in the DCB-TACE group and 74.4% (64/86) in the cTACE group (p<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that the TACE procedure, Child-Pugh score, serum aspartate aminotransferase (AST) level, alpha fetoprotein level, and tumor size were independent significant predictors of TE4. The frequencies of elevated serum AST and alanine transaminase levels after TACE were significantly lower in patients in the DCB-TACE group (p<0.001 each). No significant difference in biliary/liver damage was evident between the groups.

Conclusion: The local efficacy of cTACE was higher than that of DCB-TACE. Adverse events were milder after DCB-TACE than after cTACE.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肝细胞癌经动脉化疗栓塞的局部疗效和安全性:表柔比星DC珠与表柔比星脂醇乳剂与明胶海绵(cace)
目的:比较表柔比星载DC珠(DCB-TACE)与常规TACE (cTACE)用于肝细胞癌(HCC)经动脉化疗栓塞(TACE)的疗效和安全性。材料与方法:本回顾性研究纳入64例患者(平均年龄73.3岁;2014年至2015年间接受初始DCB-TACE的44名男性,20名女性,66名患者(平均年龄71.3岁;38名男性,28名女性)在2011年至2013年期间接受了初始cace作为历史对照。比较两组间TACE术后3个月对靶病变的治疗效果、靶病变再治疗时间、TACE术后不良事件。对影响治疗效果的因素进行单因素和多因素分析。结果:根据2015版《肝癌疗效评价标准》,DCB-TACE组的靶病变治疗疗效相当于完全缓解,TE4为51.0% (53/104),cTACE组为74.4% (64/86)(p结论:cTACE的局部疗效高于DCB-TACE。DCB-TACE组的不良事件较cace组轻。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Preface to the Featured Topic "Image-guided Puncture". Basic Techniques and Technical Tips for Ultrasound-guided Needle Puncture. Embolotherapy of Head and Neck Lesions: Basics and Clinical Tips. Innovative Techniques for Image-guided Percutaneous Puncture: Navigating Complex Cases for Successful Outcomes. Adrenal Hemorrhage as a Complication of Plug-assisted Retrograde Transvenous Obliteration of Gastrorenal Shunt Managed by Adrenal Artery Embolization: A Case Report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1