Impact of Procedural Quality on Outcomes of Transarterial Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Study.

IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Liver Cancer Pub Date : 2026-02-09 DOI:10.1159/000550734
Nan Jiang, Wen Zhang, Zhenwei Peng, Chang Liu, Yu-Dong Xiao, Wei-Zhu Yang, Rong Ding, Li-Nan Yin, Jian-Qiang Jiang, Cai-Fang Ni, Zhi-Ping Yan, Ming Kuang, Gao-Jun Teng, Bin-Yan Zhong
{"title":"Impact of Procedural Quality on Outcomes of Transarterial Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Study.","authors":"Nan Jiang, Wen Zhang, Zhenwei Peng, Chang Liu, Yu-Dong Xiao, Wei-Zhu Yang, Rong Ding, Li-Nan Yin, Jian-Qiang Jiang, Cai-Fang Ni, Zhi-Ping Yan, Ming Kuang, Gao-Jun Teng, Bin-Yan Zhong","doi":"10.1159/000550734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the primary treatment modality for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the lack of standardization to optimal technique leads to a wide variation in outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of procedure quality of TACE on HCC management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multicenter retrospective cohort study included HCC patients with ≤4 tumors (maximum diameter ≤7 cm) treated with TACE monotherapy as first-line treatment between January 2009 and December 2022. Patients were classified into precision TACE and non-precision TACE groups based on adherence to predefined technical criteria encompassing angiography, catheterization, embolic agents, embolization endpoints, and assessment. The procedural quality was further stratified using a scoring system (where points were deducted for technical deficiencies). The primary outcome was objective response rate (ORR) after first TACE (first ORR) based on modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Secondary outcomes included overall ORR, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety profiles.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 3,059 patients (median age, 58.00 years [IQR: 49.00-66.00]; 2,592 males [84.7%]) with 2,286 patients included in precision TACE and 773 patients included in non-precision TACE group. First ORR was 59.4% (1,359/2,286) in the precision TACE group versus 47.0% (363/773) in the non-precision TACE group (<i>p</i> < 0.001), with overall ORR of 70.6% (1,615/2,286) versus 59.8% (462/773) (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Median PFS was 14.00 months (IQR: 7.13-32.80) versus 10.80 months (IQR: 5.00-25.30) (HR = 0.787 [95% CI: 0.719-0.861], <i>p</i> < 0.001), and median OS was 33.63 months (IQR: 16.13-78.21) versus 26.37 months (IQR: 13.00-55.57) (HR = 0.792 [95% CI: 0.716-0.876], <i>p</i> < 0.001). The quality scoring system demonstrated a direct correlation between procedural quality and treatment response. Patients in precision TACE group had lower rates of hepatobiliary toxicity (elevated total bilirubin, 17.4% [398/2,286] vs. 33.8% [261/773], <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Precision TACE was associated with improved outcomes and safety in HCC. The proposed scoring system correlates with treatment outcomes, suggesting its utility as a quality assessment tool for TACE procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":18156,"journal":{"name":"Liver Cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13038286/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Liver Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000550734","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the primary treatment modality for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the lack of standardization to optimal technique leads to a wide variation in outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of procedure quality of TACE on HCC management.

Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study included HCC patients with ≤4 tumors (maximum diameter ≤7 cm) treated with TACE monotherapy as first-line treatment between January 2009 and December 2022. Patients were classified into precision TACE and non-precision TACE groups based on adherence to predefined technical criteria encompassing angiography, catheterization, embolic agents, embolization endpoints, and assessment. The procedural quality was further stratified using a scoring system (where points were deducted for technical deficiencies). The primary outcome was objective response rate (ORR) after first TACE (first ORR) based on modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Secondary outcomes included overall ORR, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety profiles.

Results: The analysis included 3,059 patients (median age, 58.00 years [IQR: 49.00-66.00]; 2,592 males [84.7%]) with 2,286 patients included in precision TACE and 773 patients included in non-precision TACE group. First ORR was 59.4% (1,359/2,286) in the precision TACE group versus 47.0% (363/773) in the non-precision TACE group (p < 0.001), with overall ORR of 70.6% (1,615/2,286) versus 59.8% (462/773) (p < 0.001). Median PFS was 14.00 months (IQR: 7.13-32.80) versus 10.80 months (IQR: 5.00-25.30) (HR = 0.787 [95% CI: 0.719-0.861], p < 0.001), and median OS was 33.63 months (IQR: 16.13-78.21) versus 26.37 months (IQR: 13.00-55.57) (HR = 0.792 [95% CI: 0.716-0.876], p < 0.001). The quality scoring system demonstrated a direct correlation between procedural quality and treatment response. Patients in precision TACE group had lower rates of hepatobiliary toxicity (elevated total bilirubin, 17.4% [398/2,286] vs. 33.8% [261/773], p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Precision TACE was associated with improved outcomes and safety in HCC. The proposed scoring system correlates with treatment outcomes, suggesting its utility as a quality assessment tool for TACE procedures.

程序质量对肝细胞癌经动脉化疗栓塞治疗结果的影响:一项多中心研究。
简介:经动脉化疗栓塞(TACE)是中期肝细胞癌(HCC)的主要治疗方式。然而,缺乏对最佳技术的标准化导致了结果的广泛差异。本研究旨在评估TACE手术质量对HCC治疗的影响。方法:本多中心回顾性队列研究纳入2009年1月至2022年12月一线接受TACE单药治疗的≤4个肿瘤(最大直径≤7 cm) HCC患者。根据预先确定的技术标准,包括血管造影、导管插管、栓塞剂、栓塞终点和评估,将患者分为精确TACE组和非精确TACE组。程序质量使用计分系统进一步分层(因技术缺陷而扣分)。主要终点是基于修正的实体瘤反应评价标准的首次TACE后客观缓解率(ORR)。次要结局包括总ORR、无进展生存期(PFS)、总生存期(OS)和安全性。结果:共纳入3059例患者(中位年龄58.00岁[IQR: 49.00-66.00],男性2592例[84.7%]),其中精密TACE组2286例,非精密TACE组773例。精确TACE组的首次ORR为59.4%(1359 / 2286),非精确TACE组为47.0% (363/773)(p < 0.001),总ORR为70.6%(1615 / 2286)和59.8% (462/773)(p < 0.001)。中位PFS为14.00个月(IQR: 7.13-32.80) vs 10.80个月(IQR: 5.00-25.30) (HR = 0.787 [95% CI: 0.719-0.861], p < 0.001),中位OS为33.63个月(IQR: 16.13-78.21) vs 26.37个月(IQR: 13.00-55.57) (HR = 0.792 [95% CI: 0.716-0.876], p < 0.001)。质量评分系统显示了程序质量与治疗反应之间的直接相关性。精准TACE组患者肝胆毒性发生率较低(总胆红素升高,17.4% [398/2,286]vs. 33.8% [261/773], p < 0.001)。结论:精确TACE与HCC预后和安全性的改善相关。建议的评分系统与治疗结果相关,表明其作为TACE程序质量评估工具的效用。
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
Liver Cancer
Liver Cancer Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
20.80
自引率
7.20%
发文量
53
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Liver Cancer is a journal that serves the international community of researchers and clinicians by providing a platform for research results related to the causes, mechanisms, and therapy of liver cancer. It focuses on molecular carcinogenesis, prevention, surveillance, diagnosis, and treatment, including molecular targeted therapy. The journal publishes clinical and translational research in the field of liver cancer in both humans and experimental models. It publishes original and review articles and has an Impact Factor of 13.8. The journal is indexed and abstracted in various platforms including PubMed, PubMed Central, Web of Science, Science Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, Google Scholar, DOAJ, Chemical Abstracts Service, Scopus, Embase, Pathway Studio, and WorldCat.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书