Incomplete radiofrequency ablation following transarterial chemoembolization accelerates the progression of large hepatocellular carcinoma.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Shangdong Mu, Qingjuan Chen, Shuo Li, Dongfeng Wang, Yongchang Zhao, Xiang Li, Wei Fu, Zhigang Fan, Shan Tian, Zeng Li
{"title":"Incomplete radiofrequency ablation following transarterial chemoembolization accelerates the progression of large hepatocellular carcinoma.","authors":"Shangdong Mu,&nbsp;Qingjuan Chen,&nbsp;Shuo Li,&nbsp;Dongfeng Wang,&nbsp;Yongchang Zhao,&nbsp;Xiang Li,&nbsp;Wei Fu,&nbsp;Zhigang Fan,&nbsp;Shan Tian,&nbsp;Zeng Li","doi":"10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_2296_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To examine post-operative progression and risk impact of insufficient radiofrequency ablation (RFA) following transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for the prognosis of large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>From January 2014 to January 2021 were analyzed. A total of 343 patients with large HCC (diameter >5 cm) who received TACE combined with RFA were enrolled and were divided into two groups: complete ablation (CA, n = 172) and insufficient ablation (IA, n = 171). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were determined by the Kaplan-Meier curve and compared with the log-rank test. To find parameters influencing OS and PFS, clinicopathological variables underwent univariate and multivariate analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS and PFS rates of the CA group were significantly higher than that of the IA group (P < 0.001). 25 (41%) patients in local tumor progression (LTP), 36 (59%) in intrahepatic distant recurrence (IDR), and 0 (0%) in extrahepatic distant recurrence (EDR) in the CA group. 51 (32.1%) patients in LTP, 96 (60.4%) patients in IDR, and 12 (7.5%) cases in EDR in the IA group. The recurrence patterns of the two groups were statistically significant difference (P = 0.039). In multivariate analysis, inadequate ablation and conjunction with TKIs were both significant risk factors for OS and PFS. Apart from these, older age and >7 cm of tumor size were indicators of poor OS and multiple tumors were indicators of poor PFS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Insufficient ablation causes a poor survival outcome of TACE combined with RFA for large HCC, particularly, which can promote IDR.</p>","PeriodicalId":15208,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cancer research and therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cancer research and therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_2296_22","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To examine post-operative progression and risk impact of insufficient radiofrequency ablation (RFA) following transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for the prognosis of large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Materials and methods: From January 2014 to January 2021 were analyzed. A total of 343 patients with large HCC (diameter >5 cm) who received TACE combined with RFA were enrolled and were divided into two groups: complete ablation (CA, n = 172) and insufficient ablation (IA, n = 171). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were determined by the Kaplan-Meier curve and compared with the log-rank test. To find parameters influencing OS and PFS, clinicopathological variables underwent univariate and multivariate analysis.

Results: The cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS and PFS rates of the CA group were significantly higher than that of the IA group (P < 0.001). 25 (41%) patients in local tumor progression (LTP), 36 (59%) in intrahepatic distant recurrence (IDR), and 0 (0%) in extrahepatic distant recurrence (EDR) in the CA group. 51 (32.1%) patients in LTP, 96 (60.4%) patients in IDR, and 12 (7.5%) cases in EDR in the IA group. The recurrence patterns of the two groups were statistically significant difference (P = 0.039). In multivariate analysis, inadequate ablation and conjunction with TKIs were both significant risk factors for OS and PFS. Apart from these, older age and >7 cm of tumor size were indicators of poor OS and multiple tumors were indicators of poor PFS.

Conclusion: Insufficient ablation causes a poor survival outcome of TACE combined with RFA for large HCC, particularly, which can promote IDR.

经动脉化疗栓塞后不完全射频消融加速了大肝癌的进展。
目的:探讨经动脉化疗栓塞(TACE)术后射频消融(RFA)不足对大肝癌(HCC)预后的影响及术后进展。材料与方法:2014年1月- 2021年1月。本研究共纳入343例接受TACE联合RFA治疗的大肝癌(直径>5 cm)患者,分为完全消融组(CA, n = 172)和不充分消融组(IA, n = 171)。总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)由Kaplan-Meier曲线确定,并与log-rank检验进行比较。为了找到影响OS和PFS的参数,我们对临床病理变量进行了单因素和多因素分析。结果:CA组1、3、5年累计OS和PFS均显著高于IA组(P < 0.001)。CA组局部肿瘤进展(LTP) 25例(41%),肝内远处复发(IDR) 36例(59%),肝外远处复发(EDR) 0例(0%)。IA组LTP 51例(32.1%),IDR 96例(60.4%),EDR 12例(7.5%)。两组复发类型比较,差异有统计学意义(P = 0.039)。在多变量分析中,不充分的消融和联合TKIs都是OS和PFS的重要危险因素。此外,年龄较大、肿瘤大小>7 cm为OS差的指标,多发肿瘤为PFS差的指标。结论:消融不充分导致TACE联合RFA治疗大肝癌的生存预后较差,尤其可促进IDR。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
15.40%
发文量
299
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The journal will cover technical and clinical studies related to health, ethical and social issues in field of Medical oncology, radiation oncology, medical imaging, radiation protection, non-ionising radiation, radiobiology. Articles with clinical interest and implications will be given preference.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信