不可切除肝细胞癌动脉内转化疗法后的手术切除与热消融:根据 STROBE 指南进行的多中心回顾性研究。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY International Journal of Hyperthermia Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-23 DOI:10.1080/02656736.2024.2380001
Yusen Du, Chao An, Wendao Liu
{"title":"不可切除肝细胞癌动脉内转化疗法后的手术切除与热消融:根据 STROBE 指南进行的多中心回顾性研究。","authors":"Yusen Du, Chao An, Wendao Liu","doi":"10.1080/02656736.2024.2380001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Intra-arterial conversion therapy (ICT) is a promising option for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, the selection of sequential therapeutic modalities is still controversial. This study compared the efficacy and safety of surgical resection (SR) versus thermal ablation (TA) after patients with uHCC received ICT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From May 2008 to November 2021, 3553 consecutive patients were reviewed and 791 patients were downstaged to receive TA or SR. Among them, 340 patients received SR, and 451 received TA after ICTs. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was applied to reduce selection bias between groups. Cumulative overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test. The occurrence of complications and adverse events (AEs) were compared using chi-square test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After PSM 1:1 (<i>n</i> = 185 in both groups), the 10-year OS and PFS rates for patients who underwent SR were comparable to those of patients who underwent TA (OS: 45.2% vs. 36.1%; <i>p</i> = 0.190; PFS: 19.3% vs. 15.9%; <i>p</i> = 0.533). A total of 237 (29.9%) patients (203 males; mean age:57.1 ± 11.0 years) received downstaging therapy, and long-term OS and PFS remained comparable between the two groups (<i>p</i> = 0.718, 0.636, respectively). However, the cumulative OS and PFS rates in the downstaged cohort were significantly higher than those in the nondownstaged cohort (both <i>p</i>s < 0.001). Additionally, there was no difference in major complications between the two groups (SR: 6.3% vs. TA: 8.6%; <i>p</i> = 0.320).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TA might be an acceptable first-line alternative to SR after patients with uHCC receive ICT, especially patients unsuitable for SR. Better long-term survival was observed among patients in the downstaged cohort compared to those who failed to downstage.</p>","PeriodicalId":14137,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Hyperthermia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surgical resection versus thermal ablation after intra-arterial conversion therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective one as per the STROBE guidelines.\",\"authors\":\"Yusen Du, Chao An, Wendao Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02656736.2024.2380001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Intra-arterial conversion therapy (ICT) is a promising option for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, the selection of sequential therapeutic modalities is still controversial. This study compared the efficacy and safety of surgical resection (SR) versus thermal ablation (TA) after patients with uHCC received ICT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From May 2008 to November 2021, 3553 consecutive patients were reviewed and 791 patients were downstaged to receive TA or SR. Among them, 340 patients received SR, and 451 received TA after ICTs. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was applied to reduce selection bias between groups. Cumulative overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test. The occurrence of complications and adverse events (AEs) were compared using chi-square test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After PSM 1:1 (<i>n</i> = 185 in both groups), the 10-year OS and PFS rates for patients who underwent SR were comparable to those of patients who underwent TA (OS: 45.2% vs. 36.1%; <i>p</i> = 0.190; PFS: 19.3% vs. 15.9%; <i>p</i> = 0.533). A total of 237 (29.9%) patients (203 males; mean age:57.1 ± 11.0 years) received downstaging therapy, and long-term OS and PFS remained comparable between the two groups (<i>p</i> = 0.718, 0.636, respectively). However, the cumulative OS and PFS rates in the downstaged cohort were significantly higher than those in the nondownstaged cohort (both <i>p</i>s < 0.001). Additionally, there was no difference in major complications between the two groups (SR: 6.3% vs. TA: 8.6%; <i>p</i> = 0.320).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TA might be an acceptable first-line alternative to SR after patients with uHCC receive ICT, especially patients unsuitable for SR. Better long-term survival was observed among patients in the downstaged cohort compared to those who failed to downstage.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Hyperthermia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Hyperthermia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2024.2380001\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Hyperthermia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2024.2380001","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:对于无法切除的肝细胞癌(uHCC)患者来说,动脉内转化疗法(ICT)是一种很有前景的选择。然而,如何选择连续治疗方式仍存在争议。本研究比较了uHCC患者接受ICT治疗后手术切除(SR)与热消融(TA)的疗效和安全性:方法:2008 年 5 月至 2021 年 11 月,研究人员对 3553 例连续患者进行了回顾性分析,并对 791 例患者进行了分期,以确定其接受 TA 或 SR 治疗。其中,340名患者接受了SR治疗,451名患者在接受ICT治疗后接受了TA治疗。为减少组间选择偏倚,采用了倾向评分匹配(PSM)方法。累积总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)采用 Kaplan-Meier 法和对数秩检验进行比较。并发症和不良事件(AEs)的发生率采用卡方检验进行比较:PSM 1:1后(两组均为185人),接受SR治疗的患者的10年OS和PFS率与接受TA治疗的患者相当(OS:45.2% vs. 36.1%;P = 0.190;PFS:19.3% vs. 15.9%;P = 0.533)。共有 237 名(29.9%)患者(203 名男性;平均年龄:57.1 ± 11.0 岁)接受了降期治疗,两组患者的长期 OS 和 PFS 仍具有可比性(P = 0.718,0.636,分别为 0.718 和 0.636)。然而,降期治疗组的累积OS和PFS率明显高于未降期治疗组(两组Ps均为0.320):结论:TA可能是uHCC患者(尤其是不适合SR的患者)接受ICT后可接受的SR一线替代方案。与未能降期的患者相比,降期患者的长期生存率更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Surgical resection versus thermal ablation after intra-arterial conversion therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective one as per the STROBE guidelines.

Purpose: Intra-arterial conversion therapy (ICT) is a promising option for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, the selection of sequential therapeutic modalities is still controversial. This study compared the efficacy and safety of surgical resection (SR) versus thermal ablation (TA) after patients with uHCC received ICT.

Methods: From May 2008 to November 2021, 3553 consecutive patients were reviewed and 791 patients were downstaged to receive TA or SR. Among them, 340 patients received SR, and 451 received TA after ICTs. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was applied to reduce selection bias between groups. Cumulative overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test. The occurrence of complications and adverse events (AEs) were compared using chi-square test.

Results: After PSM 1:1 (n = 185 in both groups), the 10-year OS and PFS rates for patients who underwent SR were comparable to those of patients who underwent TA (OS: 45.2% vs. 36.1%; p = 0.190; PFS: 19.3% vs. 15.9%; p = 0.533). A total of 237 (29.9%) patients (203 males; mean age:57.1 ± 11.0 years) received downstaging therapy, and long-term OS and PFS remained comparable between the two groups (p = 0.718, 0.636, respectively). However, the cumulative OS and PFS rates in the downstaged cohort were significantly higher than those in the nondownstaged cohort (both ps < 0.001). Additionally, there was no difference in major complications between the two groups (SR: 6.3% vs. TA: 8.6%; p = 0.320).

Conclusions: TA might be an acceptable first-line alternative to SR after patients with uHCC receive ICT, especially patients unsuitable for SR. Better long-term survival was observed among patients in the downstaged cohort compared to those who failed to downstage.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
12.90%
发文量
153
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Hyperthermia
期刊最新文献
Therapeutic effects of focused ultrasound on vulvar squamous intraepithelial lesions in rat. Evaluation of the therapeutic efficacy of high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation combined with different drugs in the treatment of adenomyosis Heat shock protein-related diagnostic signature and molecular subtypes in ankylosing spondylitis: new pathogenesis insights Hyperthermia and cisplatin combination therapy promotes caspase-8 accumulation and activation to enhance apoptosis and pyroptosis in cancer cells Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM)-derived perfusion fraction mapping for the visual evaluation of MR-guided high intensity focused ultrasound (MR-HIFU) ablation of uterine fibroids
×
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