Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
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 n = 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 (n = 45 cTACE, n = 84 DEB-TACE, n = 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.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11074216 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-024-05722-5 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!