Transarterial Chemoembolization plus Systemic Therapy versus Transarterial Chemoembolization alone for Unresectable, Nonmetastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis from Randomized Controlled Trials.

IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Liver Cancer Pub Date : 2026-04-30 DOI:10.1159/000552229
Jiaxi Liu, Huan Zhai, Liqi Shang, Peng Wang, Jiaxuan Liu, Luke Wang, Qiwen You, Meiwen Qin, Yanan Ma, Haibo Shao
{"title":"Transarterial Chemoembolization plus Systemic Therapy versus Transarterial Chemoembolization alone for Unresectable, Nonmetastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis from Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Jiaxi Liu, Huan Zhai, Liqi Shang, Peng Wang, Jiaxuan Liu, Luke Wang, Qiwen You, Meiwen Qin, Yanan Ma, Haibo Shao","doi":"10.1159/000552229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the standard treatment for unresectable, nonmetastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although adding systemic therapies (TACE + S) is hypothesized to mitigate TACE-induced angiogenesis and enhance efficacy, the definitive clinical advantage of TACE + S over TACE monotherapy, particularly with respect to overall survival (OS), remains uncertain. We aimed to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of this combination using a rigorous meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched major databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TACE + S versus TACE alone or TACE plus placebo in patients with unresectable HCC without macrovascular invasion or extrahepatic metastasis. The primary outcome was OS; secondary outcomes included progression-free survival, time to progression (TTP), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). TSA was employed to assess the statistical reliability of findings and the adequacy of the cumulative evidence across all outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 10 RCTs comprising 2,296 patients were included. Compared with TACE alone/placebo, TACE + S demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73-0.95, <i>p</i> = 0.008), with TSA confirming the statistical reliability of the evidence. TACE + S also significantly improved TTP based on mRECIST (HR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.54-0.74, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and ORR by RECIST 1.1 (relative risk = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.22-1.70, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed a more pronounced OS benefit in patients with HBV-related HCC (HR = 0.69, <i>p</i> = 0.009). However, the combination strategy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of both all-grade and grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs, though no treatment-related deaths were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with unresectable, nonmetastatic HCC, the combination of TACE and systemic therapy provides superior OS, more favorable tumor control, and delayed disease progression compared with TACE monotherapy. These significant benefits are particularly pronounced in the HBV-associated HCC population. While the increased risk of AEs is notable, this approach remains a viable option, underscoring the necessity for careful patient selection and proactive management strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":18156,"journal":{"name":"Liver Cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13322702/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Liver Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000552229","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 standard treatment for unresectable, nonmetastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although adding systemic therapies (TACE + S) is hypothesized to mitigate TACE-induced angiogenesis and enhance efficacy, the definitive clinical advantage of TACE + S over TACE monotherapy, particularly with respect to overall survival (OS), remains uncertain. We aimed to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of this combination using a rigorous meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA).

Methods: We systematically searched major databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TACE + S versus TACE alone or TACE plus placebo in patients with unresectable HCC without macrovascular invasion or extrahepatic metastasis. The primary outcome was OS; secondary outcomes included progression-free survival, time to progression (TTP), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). TSA was employed to assess the statistical reliability of findings and the adequacy of the cumulative evidence across all outcomes.

Results: A total of 10 RCTs comprising 2,296 patients were included. Compared with TACE alone/placebo, TACE + S demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73-0.95, p = 0.008), with TSA confirming the statistical reliability of the evidence. TACE + S also significantly improved TTP based on mRECIST (HR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.54-0.74, p < 0.001) and ORR by RECIST 1.1 (relative risk = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.22-1.70, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed a more pronounced OS benefit in patients with HBV-related HCC (HR = 0.69, p = 0.009). However, the combination strategy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of both all-grade and grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs, though no treatment-related deaths were reported.

Conclusion: In patients with unresectable, nonmetastatic HCC, the combination of TACE and systemic therapy provides superior OS, more favorable tumor control, and delayed disease progression compared with TACE monotherapy. These significant benefits are particularly pronounced in the HBV-associated HCC population. While the increased risk of AEs is notable, this approach remains a viable option, underscoring the necessity for careful patient selection and proactive management strategies.

经动脉化疗栓塞加全身治疗与单独经动脉化疗栓塞治疗不可切除的非转移性肝细胞癌:随机对照试验的荟萃分析和试验序列分析。
经动脉化疗栓塞(TACE)是不可切除的非转移性肝细胞癌(HCC)的标准治疗方法。虽然假设添加全身治疗(TACE + S)可以减轻TACE诱导的血管生成并提高疗效,但TACE + S优于TACE单药治疗的确切临床优势,特别是在总生存期(OS)方面,仍不确定。我们的目的是通过严格的荟萃分析和试验序贯分析(TSA)来全面评估这种组合的疗效和安全性。方法:我们系统地检索了主要的随机对照试验(rct)数据库,比较TACE + S与TACE单独或TACE加安慰剂在无大血管侵犯或肝外转移的不可切除HCC患者中的疗效。主要结局为OS;次要结局包括无进展生存期、进展时间(TTP)、客观缓解率(ORR)和不良事件(ae)。采用TSA评估结果的统计可靠性和所有结果累积证据的充分性。结果:共纳入10项rct, 2296例患者。与单独使用TACE /安慰剂相比,TACE + S对OS的改善具有统计学意义(风险比[HR] = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73-0.95, p = 0.008), TSA证实了证据的统计可靠性。TACE + S还显著改善了基于mRECIST的TTP (HR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.54-0.74, p < 0.001)和基于RECIST 1.1的ORR(相对风险= 1.44,95% CI: 1.22-1.70, p < 0.001)。亚组分析显示,hbv相关HCC患者的OS获益更明显(HR = 0.69, p = 0.009)。然而,联合治疗策略与全级别和≥3级治疗相关不良事件的发生率均显著升高相关,但未报告与治疗相关的死亡。结论:在不可切除的非转移性HCC患者中,与TACE单药治疗相比,TACE联合全身治疗可提供更好的OS,更有利的肿瘤控制和延迟疾病进展。这些显著的益处在hbv相关的HCC人群中尤为明显。虽然不良反应的风险明显增加,但这种方法仍然是一种可行的选择,强调了仔细选择患者和积极主动的管理策略的必要性。
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