Conventional vs drug-eluting beads transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma

Transarterial chemoembolization(TACE) is the current standard of therapy for patients with intermediatestage hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer classification. The concept of conventional TACE(cTACE) is the selective obstruction of tumor-feeding artery by injection of chemotherapeutic agents, leading to ischemic necrosis of the target tumor via cytotoxic and ischemic effects. Drugeluting beads(DEBs) have been imposed as novel drugdelivering agents for TACE, which allows for higher concentrations of drugs within the target tumor and lower systemic concentrations compared with cTACE. Despite the theoretical advantages of DEB-TACE, it is still controversial in clinical practice as to whether DEBTACE is superior to cTACE in regard to overall survival and treatment response. In this review article, we summarize the clinical efficacy and safety of DEB-TACE for patients with intermediate or advanced stage HCC in comparison with cTACE.     

Drug-eluting beads transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: Current state of the art

Transarterial chemoembolization(TACE) represents the current gold standard for hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) patients in intermediate stage. Conventional TACE(c TACE) is performed with the injection of an emulsion of a chemotherapeutic drug with lipiodol into the artery feeding the tumoral nodules, followed by embolization of the same vessel to obtain a synergistic effect of drug cytotoxic activity and ischemia. Aim of this review is to summarize the main characteristics of drug-eluting beads(DEB)-TACE and the clinical results reported so far in the literature. A literature search was conducted using Pub Med until June 2017. In order to overcome the drawbacks of c TACE, namely lack of standardization and unpredictability of outcomes, non-absorbable embolic microspheres charged with cytotoxic agents(DEBs) have been developed. DEBs are able to simultaneously exert both the therapeutic components of TACE, either drug-carrier function and embolization, unlike c TACE in which applying the embolic agent is a second moment after drug injection. This way, risk of systemic drug release is minimal due to both high-affinity carrier activity of DEBs and absence of a time interval between injection and embolization. However, despite promising results of preliminary studies, clear evidence of superiority of DEB-TACE over c TACE is still lacking. A number of novel technical devices are actually in development in the field of loco-regional treatments for HCC, but only a few of them have entered the clinical arena. In absence of well-designed randomized-controlled trials, the decision on whether use DEB-TACE or c TACE is still controversial.     

Transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: Barcelona clinic liver cancer staging system

Hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC),the fifth most common cancer that predominantly occurs in liver cirrhosis patients,requires staging systems to design treatments. The barcelona clinic liver cancer staging system(BCLC) is the most commonly used HCC management guideline. For BCLC stage B(intermediate HCC),transarterial chemoembolization(TACE) is the standard treatment. Many studies support the use of TACE in early and advanced HCC patients. For BCLC stage 0(very early HCC),TACE could be an alternative for patients unsuitable for radiofrequency ablation(RFA) or hepatic resection. In patients with BCLC stage A,TACE plus RFA provides better local tumor control than RFA alone. TACE can serve as bridge therapy for patients awaiting liver transplantation. For patients with BCLC B,TACE provides survival benefits compared with supportive care options. However,because of the substantial heterogeneity in the patient population with this stage,a better patient stratification system is needed to select the best candidates for TACE. Sorafenib represents the first line treatment in patients with BCLC C stage HCC. Sorafenib plus TACE has shown a demonstrable effect in delaying tumor progression. Additionally,TACE plus radiotherapy has yielded better survival in patients with HCC and portal venous thrombosis. Considering these observations together,TACE clearly has a critical role in the treatment of HCC as a stand-alone or combination therapy in each stage of HCC. Diverse treatment modalities should be used for patients with HCC and a better patient stratification system should be developed to select the best candidates for TACE.     

Liver resection for intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) is one of the most common malignant tumors in China. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer(BCLC) staging system is regarded as the gold standard staging system for HCC, classifying HCC as early, intermediate, or advanced. For intermediate HCC, trans-catheter arterial chemoembolization(TACE) is recommended as the optimal strategy by the BCLC guideline. This review investigates whether liver resection is better than TACE for intermediate HCC. Based on published studies, we compare the survival benefits and complications of liver resection and TACE for intermediate HCC. We also compare the survival benefits of liver resection in early and intermediate HCC. We find that liver resection can achieve better or at least comparable survival outcomes compared with TACE for intermediate HCC; however, we do not observe a significant difference between liver resection and TACE in terms of safety and morbidity. We conclude that liver resection may improve the short- and long-term survival of carefully selected intermediate HCC patients, and the procedure may be safely performed in the management of intermediate HCC.     

Recent advances in medical management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Transcatheter arterial therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have developed during the last decade. A fine powder formulation of cisplatin and the new platinum agent miriplatin became standard medicines in addition to anthracyclines in transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) in Japan. Recent prospective and retrospective studies supported the usefulness of platinum agents as a chemotherapeutic at the time of varied TACE therapy. Although balloon‐occluded TACE is an effective therapy for localized HCC and drug‐eluting microspheres seemed to show a higher response rate in certain HCCs, the definite advantages of those procedures still remain uncertain. Intermediate stage HCC, or Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B, is regarded as a heterogeneous category with a wide spectrum of tumors and patients, and several subclassifications of the stage have been proposed to show different prognoses; there are also different recommended therapies in each subgroup. Authors have subclassified patients based on combinations of tumor size, tumor number, and liver function, with or without performance status. Because of differences of available medical resources and techniques in treatment procedures between countries, the most ideal and useful subgrouping remains inconclusive at present. Recently, a few systemic chemotherapies proved to be effective for advanced stage HCC in phase III studies: lenvatinib as the first line of therapy, and regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab as second‐line therapy. Other molecular‐targeted and immune‐oncological medicines are expected to follow in the near future. Some studies have suggested an advantage of early introduction of molecular‐targeted therapy for TACE‐resistant HCC in the intermediate stage.     

Nonoperative therapies for combined modality treatment of hepatocellular cancer: expert consensus statement

Although surgical resection and liver transplantation are the only treatment modalities that enable prolonged survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the majority of HCC patients presents with advanced disease and do not undergo resective or ablative therapy. Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is indicated in intermediate/advanced stage unresectable HCC even in the setting of portal vein involvement (excluding main portal vein). Sorafenib has been shown to improve survival of patients with advanced HCC in two controlled randomized trials. Yttrium 90 is a safe microembolization treatment that can be used as an alternative to TACE in patients with advanced liver only disease or in case of portal vein thrombosis. External beam radiation can be helpful to provide local control in selected unresectable HCC. These different treatment modalities may be combined in the treatment strategy of HCC and also used as a bridge to resection or liver transplantation. Patients should undergo formal multidisciplinary evaluation prior to initiating any such treatment in order to individualize the best available options.     

Transarterial chemoembolization with drug-eluting beads in hepatocellular carcinoma

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is a widely used standard treatment for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are not suitable candidates for curative treatments. The rationale for TACE is that intra-arterial chemotherapy using lipiodol and chemotherapeutic agents, followed by selective vascular embolization, results in a strong cytotoxic effect as well as ischemia (conventional TACE). Recently, drug-eluting beads (DC Beads^®) have been developed for transcatheter treatment of HCC to deliver higher doses of the chemotherapeutic agent and to prolong contact time with the tumor. DC Beads^® can actively sequester doxorubicin hydrochloride from solution and release it in a controlled sustained fashion. Treatment with DC Beads^® substantially reduced the amount of chemotherapeutic agent that reached the systemic circulation compared with conventional, lipiodol-based regimens, significantly reducing drug-related adverse events. In this article, we describe the treatment response, survival, and safety of TACE used with drug-eluting beads for the treatment of HCC and discuss future therapeutic possibilities.     

Chemotherapy for transarterial chemoembolization in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM: To compare the efficacy of different chemotherapeutic agents during conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).METHODS: A retrospective review was undertaken of patients with unresectable HCC undergoing cTACE from May 2003 to November 2011. A total of 107 patients were treated with at least one cTACE session. Irinotecan (CPT-11) was used as a chemotherapeutic agent in 24 patients, gemcitabine (GEM) in 24 and doxorubicin in 59.RESULTS: The time to progression and overall survival rates were significantly superior in patients treated with CPT-11 compared with the GEM or doxorubicin treated groups (11.4, 8.2, 9.5 mo, P = 0.02 and 21.7, 12.7, 14.5 mo, P = 0.004, respectively). Subgroup analysis showed that for intermediate-stage HCC, CPT-11 resulted in a significantly longer time to progression and overall survival compared with the GEM or doxorubicin treated groups (P = 0.022; P = 0.003, respectively). There were no significant differences in adverse events among the three groups (P > 0.05).CONCLUSION: For patients treated with cTACE, the chemotherapeutic agent CPT-11 was significantly associated with improved overall survival and delayed tumor progression compared with GEM or doxorubicin. There were no significant differences in clinical adverse events between the three agents. CPT-11 thus appears to be a promising agent when combined with cTACE for the treatment of HCC.     

Transarterial chemoembolization versus transarterial radioembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma: optimization of selecting treatment modality

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) of intermediate stage consists of diverse tumor and patient factors in terms of tumor number, size and liver function resulting in various outcomes given by transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). Transarterial radioembolization (TARE) using radioactive isotope, β-ray emitting Yttrium-90 with a short half-life and penetration depth, is an emerging intra-arterial brachytherapy characterized by potent anti-cancer effect given by radiation but minimal embolic effect. Although there is lack of study directly comparing the efficacy and safety between TACE and TARE in patients with unresectable HCC, several retrospective or small-scaled studies suggest that overall efficacy indicated by overall survival and time to progression is similar between two modalities and TARE has a superiority in the safety including postembolization syndrome, hospitalization days and outpatient-based therapy. In advanced HCC with portal vein (PV) invasion, TACE is not consistently recommended due to risk of hepatic decompensation or failure after procedure. On the contrary, available data suggest that TARE might be a promising treatment option in HCC with PV thrombosis if patient’s liver function is preserved and the level of PV invasion is less than main trunk. Ongoing trials comparing TARE and sorafenib in advanced HCC would elucidate the role of this locoregional therapy. The need of a multidisciplinary team, complex steps of procedure and high cost of TARE are the hurdles to widespread recommendation of this therapy in intermediate or advanced HCC. The optimization of selection between TACE and TARE might be dependent on availability, experience, tumor factors and patient factors.     

Transarterial chemoembolization for inoperable,early stage hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with Child-Pugh grade A and B: results of a comparative study in 96 Chinese patients

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in prolongation of survival is controversial. We conducted a comparative study to determine whether TACE treatment had any survival benefit for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and with relatively preserved liver function. METHODS: In all, 96 patients with unresectable HCC of Okuda stage I or II and Child-Pugh grade A or B were recruited. A total of 80 patients (group 1) who received TACE were compared to 16 patients (group 2) who were treated conservatively. RESULTS: The median survival time of group 1 patients was significantly longer than that of group 2 patients (31.2 vs 14.1 months respectively, p = 0.0126). The cumulative survival rates at 6 months, 1 yr, 2 yr, 3 yr, and 4 yr of group 1 compared to group 2 were as follows: 93.8% versus 62.5% (p = 0.002); 86.3% versus 62.5% (p = 0.023); 78.8% versus 50% (p = 0.017); 57.5% versus 50% (p = ns); and 51.3% versus 43.8% (p = ns), respectively. Tumor response was observed in 28% of patients receiving TACE. Patients with higher pretreatment albumin levels, lower pretreatment alpha-fetoprotein levels, and Okuda stage I disease were associated with a favorable response to TACE. CONCLUSION: TACE treatment improved survival in patients with unresectable HCC in the early stages and with relatively preserved liver function.     

Nine-year experience of doxorubicin-eluting beads chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND: Chemoembolization with doxorubucin-eluting beads (DEB) has been used to treat hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since 2007. This study compared the efifcacy and sur-vival between transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) with DEB and conventional approach (cTACE) in HCC treatment.
METHODS: This retrospective case-control study compared the overall survival and tumor response of HCC patients to cTACE (n=190) and DEB (n=143) by the reassessment of com-puted tomography and serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP). Mul-tivariate analysis was used to determine the factors affecting tumor response.
RESULTS: The median post-treatment to pre-treatment AFP level was 0.8 for a DEB session (n=258) and 1.0 for a cTACE session (n=452), showing a signiifcantly greater decrease in AFP after DEB (P<0.05). More patients in the DEB group achieved objective response (complete and partial) compared with those in the cTACE group (P<0.05). Objective tumor re-sponse after DEB vs cTACE was 34.8% vs 15.4% in 0-3 months (P=0.001), 37.1% vs 20.0% in 3-6 months (P<0.05), and 50.0%vs 30.0% in 6-12 months (P=0.093). DEB predicted a 3.604 times odds of achieving at least one objective tumor response in a patient when compared to cTACE (P<0.0001). The median survival from ifrst transcatheter therapy of patients having undergone at least once DEB was 12.53 months, while those having received cTACE only was 10.53 months (P=0.086). A tendency of improved survival appeared to maintain until >80 months after the ifrst TACE session in the DEB group.
CONCLUSION: DEB is a safe alternative to cTACE in HCC pa-tients with better therapeutic efifcacy.     

Idarubicin vs doxorubicin in transarterial chemoembolization of intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND Liver cancer is the fifth most common cancer and the second cause of cancerrelated deaths worldwide.Transarterial chemoembolization(TACE)is the best treatment of intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC).Doxorubicin is the most commonly used drug despite a low level of evidence.AIM To compare the objective response rate of idarubicin-based TACE(Ida-TACE)against doxorubicin-based TACE(Dox-TACE)in intermediate stage HCC.METHODS Between January 2012 and December 2014,all patients treated with TACE at our academic hospital were screened.Inclusion criteria were patients with Child-Pugh score A or B,a performance status below or equal to 1,and no prior TACE.Either lipiodol TACE or drug-eluting beads TACE could be performed with 10 mg of idarubicin or 50 mg of doxorubicin.Each patient treated with idarubicin was matched with two doxorubicin-treated patients.The TACE response was assessed by independent radiologists according to the mRECIST criteria.RESULTS Sixty patients were treated with doxorubicin and thirty with idarubicin.There were 93%and 87%of cirrhotic patients and 87%and 70%of Child-Pugh A in the doxorubicin and idarubicin groups,respectively.The median number of HCC per patient was two in both groups with 31%and 26%of single nodules in doxorubicin and idarubicin groups,respectively.Objective response rate after first TACE was 76.7%and 73.3%(P=0.797)with 41.7%and 40.0%complete response in doxorubicin and idarubicin groups,respectively.Progression-free survival was 7.7 mo in both groups,and liver transplant-free survival was 24.9 mo and 21.9 mo in doxorubicin and idarubicin groups,respectively.Safety profiles were similar in both groups,with grade 3-4 adverse events in 35%of Dox-TACE and 43%of Ida-TACEs.CONCLUSION Ida-TACE and Dox-TACE showed comparable results in terms of efficacy and safety.Ida-TACE may represent an interesting alternative to Dox-TACE in the management of patients with intermediate stage HCC.     

Anti-angiogenesis in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: current evidence and future perspectives

Hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) is among the most common cancer diseases worldwide.Arterial hypervascularisation is an essential step for HCC tumorigenesis and can be targeted by transarterial chemoembolization(TACE).This interventional method is the standard treatment for patients with intermediate stage HCC,but is also applied as bridging therapy for patients awaiting liver transplantation in many centers worldwide.Usually the devascularization effect induced by TACE is transient,consequently resulting in r...     

Intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma: How to choose the best treatment modality?

Intermediate stage, or stage B according to Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer classification, of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) comprises a heterogeneous population with different tumor burden and liver function. This heterogeneity is confirmed by the large variability of treatment choice and disease-relate survival. The aim of this review was to highlight the existing evidences regarding this specific topic. In a multidisciplinary evaluation, patients with large (> 5 cm) solitary HCC should be firstly considered for liver resection (LR). When LR is unfeasible, locoregional treatments are evaluable therapeutic options, being transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), the most used procedure. Percutaneous ablation can be an evaluable treatment for large HCC. However, the efficacy of all ablative procedures decrease as tumor size increases over 3 cm. In clinical practice, a combination treatment strategy [TACE or transarterial radioembolization (TARE)-plus percutaneous ablation] is “a priori” preferred in a relevant percentage of these patients. On the other hands, sorafenib is the treatment of choice in patients who are unsuitable to surgery and/or with a contraindication to locoregional treatments. In multifocal HCC, TACE is the first-line treatment. The role of TARE is still undefined. Surgery may have also a role in the treatment of multifocal HCC in selected cases (patients with up to three nodules, multifocal HCC involving 2-3 adjacent liver segments). In some patients with bilobar disease the combination of LR and ablative treatment may be a valuable option. The choice of the best treatment in the patient with intermediate stage HCC should be “patient-tailored” and made by a multidisciplinary team.     

Radiation-induced hepatic toxicity after radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

Aim: The purpose of the present study was to analyze hepatic toxicity following radiotherapy combined with regional chemotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: From 2001 to 2003, a total of 132 patients with HCC received 3-D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) combined with chemotherapy. Patients were divided into two groups based on drug localization: the transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) group, where the chemotherapeutic drug (adriamycin) was localized within the tumor, and the non-TACE group, where the drugs (adriamycin, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil) were diffusely spread over the entire liver. Results: Patients were evaluated by biochemical parameters for any hepatic toxicity prior to, during, and until 12 months after 3D-CRT. Hepatic toxicity was defined as radiation-induced liver disease (RILD) or combined modality-induced liver disease (CMILD), which is defined as RILD with abnormal elevation of total bilirubin levels. In the TACE group, three patients developed RILD (5.6%) and none developed CMILD. In the non-TACE group, three patients (3.7%) and seven patients (8.8%) developed RILD and CMILD, respectively. Conclusion: Hepatic toxicity following radiotherapy combined with regional chemotherapy for HCC might be influenced by the distribution of the chemotherapeutic drugs. A more precise understanding of hepatic toxicity from chemoradiotherapy will help design optimal treatments for HCC.     

Effective treatment strategies other than sorafenib for the patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma invading portal vein

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) accompanying portal vein tumor thrombosis(PVTT) have relatively few therapeutic options and an extremely poor prognosis. These patients are classified into barcelonaclinic liver cancer stage C and sorafenib is suggested as the standard therapy of care. However, overall survival(OS) gain from sorafenib is unsatisfactory and better treatment modalities are urgently required. Therefore, we critically appraised recent data for the various treatment strategies for patients with HCC accompanying PVTT. In suitable patients, even surgical resection can be considered a potentially curative strategy. Transarterial chemoembolization(TACE) can be performed effectively and safely in a carefully chosen population of patients with reserved liver function and sufficient collateral blood flow nearby the blocked portal vein. A recent metaanalysis demonstrated that TACE achieved a substantial improvement of OS in HCC patients accompanying PVTT compared with best supportive care. In addition, transarterial radioembolization(TARE) using yttrium-90 microspheres achieves quality-of-life advantages and is as effective as TACE. A large proportion of HCC patients accompanying PVTT are considered to be proper for TARE. Moreover, TACE or TARE achieved comparable outcomes to sorafenib in recent studies and it was also reported that the combination of radiotherapy with TACE achieved a survival gain compared to sorafenib in HCC patients accompanying PVTT. Surgical resectionbased multimodal treatments, transarterial approaches including TACE and TARE, and TACE-based appropriate combination strategies may improve OS of HCC patients accompanying PVTT.     

Re‐evaluating transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Consensus recommendations and review by an International Expert Panel

Patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) usually receive transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) or systemic therapies with intermediate and advanced‐stage disease. However, intermediate‐stage HCC patients often have unsatisfactory clinical outcomes with repeated TACE and there is considerable uncertainty surrounding the criteria for repeating or stopping TACE treatment. In July 2012, an Expert Panel Opinion on Interventions in Hepatocellular Carcinoma (EPOIHCC) was re‐convened in Shanghai in an attempt to provide a consensus on the practice of TACE, particularly in regard to evaluating TACE ‘failure’. To that end, current clinical practice throughout Asia was reviewed in detail including safety and efficacy data on TACE alone as well as in combination with targeted systemic therapies for intermediate HCC. This review summarizes the evidence discussed at the meeting and provides expert recommendations regarding the use of TACE for unresectable intermediate‐stage HCC. A key consensus of the Expert Panel was that the current definitions of TACE failure are not useful in differentiating between situations where TACE is no longer effective in controlling disease locally vs. systemically. By redefining these concepts, it may be possible to provide a clearer indication of when TACE should be repeated and more importantly, when TACE should be discontinued.     

Transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: A review of techniques

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common malignant diseases worldwide. While curative therapies, including resection, liver transplantation, and percutaneous ablation (percutaneous ethanol injection and radiofrequency ablation), are applicable for only a portion of the HCC population, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) has been recognized as an effective palliative treatment option for patients with advanced HCC. TACE is also used even for single HCCs in which it is difficult to perform surgical resection or locoregional treatment due to systemic co-morbidities or anatomical problems. TACE has become widely adopted in the treatment of HCC. By using computed tomography-angiography, TACE is capable of performing diagnosis and treatment at the same time. Furthermore, TACE plays an important role in the multidisciplinary treatment for HCC when combined with other treatment. In this review, we first discuss the history of TACE, and then review the previous findings about techniques of achieving a locoregional treatment effect (liver infarction treatment, e.g., ultra-selective TACE, balloon-occluded TACE), and the use of TACE as a drug delivery system for anti-cancer agents (palliative, e.g., platinum complex agents, drug-eluting beads) for multiple lesions.     

Comparative study of cisplatin and epirubicin in transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma

Aim: Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) is an established treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, it is unclear which chemotherapeutic agent should be selected for TACE. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of cisplatin (CDDP) with that of epirubicin (EPI) in TACE for patients with unresectable or relapsed HCC. Methods: We performed a historical cohort study involving 131 patients treated with a first TACE, defined as either an initial treatment for previously untreated HCC or a first treatment for relapsed HCC after curative resections or ablations. Efficacy was estimated as the response rate (RR) and it was adjusted for the confounding factors that were defined in this study. Results: The RR were 62.5% (20/32) for the first TACE with CDDP and 51.5% (51/99) for that with EPI. In the adjusted analysis for a history of hepatectomy, percutaneous treatment combined with TACE and tumor factors, the odds ratio was 1.72 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70–4.48). However, a test for interaction between the number of tumors and the chemotherapeutic agent was statistically significant (P = 0.016). In multiple HCC, the RR were 66.7% (10/17) for CDDP and 39.6% (30/46) for EPI. The odds ratio was 4.11 (95% CI = 1.14–17.2). Conclusion: CDDP may be more effective than EPI in TACE for multiple HCC. A randomized controlled study is needed to clarify the efficacy of CDDP in TACE in patients with multiple HCC.     

Experience from a real-life cohort: outcome of 606 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma following transarterial chemoembolization

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most lethal cancers. Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) has been accepted as the standard care for intermediate stage disease.

Methods: In this study, we characterized 606 with HCC patients from Hannover Medical School treated with TACE.

Results: 606 with HCC patients treated with TACE were identified between 2000 and 2015. Most patients (59.8%) were at intermediate stage. Following TACE, most patients subsequently received systemic therapy or best supportive care (BSC), whereas 227 (37.5%) patients were bridged to potentially curative local treatments. Depending on subsequent therapies, median post-TACE survival ranged from 7 to 162 months. Ascites, cholinesterase, c-reactive and alpha-feto protein and tumor size were identified as prognostic factors. These factors as well as the HAP, mHAP-II and STATE score also determined post-TACE survival independent of subsequent therapies. Hepatic function progressively deteriorated with repeated TACE sessions. Despite that, post-TACE survival was not shortened in frequently treated patients (≥5 times) as compared to patients treated 4 times or less (p?=?not significant [n.s.]). Patients treated ≥5 times with TACE received significantly more often systemic therapy following TACE (37.3%) as compared to patients with 3–4 (30.1%), 2 (27.4%) and 1 (21.8%) sessions (p?<?.05).

Conclusion: TACE is performed in a heterogeneous population as bridging therapy to other local treatments and palliative therapy. The long-term survival following TACE is determined by baseline tumor, patient-related factors and by subsequent therapies. Post-TACE survival is not shorter in patients with frequent treatments (≥5), and the rate of subsequent systemic treatments is higher compared to less frequently treated patients.