肝动脉灌注化疗与经导管动脉化疗栓塞作为 MVI 阳性肝细胞癌手术后的辅助疗法:多中心倾向评分匹配分析

IF 4.2 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Yuhua Wen, Lianghe Lu, Jie Mei, Yihong Ling, Renguo Guan, Wenping Lin, Wei Wei, Rongping Guo
{"title":"肝动脉灌注化疗与经导管动脉化疗栓塞作为 MVI 阳性肝细胞癌手术后的辅助疗法:多中心倾向评分匹配分析","authors":"Yuhua Wen, Lianghe Lu, Jie Mei, Yihong Ling, Renguo Guan, Wenping Lin, Wei Wei, Rongping Guo","doi":"10.2147/jhc.s453250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<strong>Background:</strong> Microvascular invasion (MVI) is a significant pathological feature in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), adjuvant hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (a-HAIC) and adjuvant transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (a-TACE), are commonly used for HCC patients with MVI. This study aims to evaluate the efficacies of two adjuvant therapies after surgical treatment for HCC, compare them, and identify the significant factors.<br/><strong>Methods:</strong> Clinical data from two randomized controlled trials involving HCC patients with MVI after surgical treatment were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance baseline differences between patients who received a-HAIC or a-TACE, and control groups who underwent hepatectomy alone. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were compared.<br/><strong>Results:</strong> In total of 549 patients were collected from two randomized controlled trials. Using the PSM and Kaplan-Meier method, the median DFS of the a-HAIC, a-TACE, and control groups was 63.2, 21.7, and 11.2 months (<em>P&lt;</em> 0.05). The a-HAIC group show significantly better 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates compared to the a-TACE and control groups (96.3%, 80.0%, 72.8% vs 84.4%, 57.0%, 29.8% vs 84.5%, 62.8%, 53.4%, P&lt; 0.05). But the OS rates of a-TACE and control groups showed no significant difference (<em>P</em>=0.279). Multivariate analysis identified a-HAIC (HR=0.449, <em>P</em>=0.000) and a-TACE (HR=0.633, <em>P</em>=0.007) as independent protective factors. For OS, a-HAIC (HR=0.388, <em>P</em>=0.003) was identified as an independent protective factor, too.<br/><strong>Conclusion:</strong> Compared to a-TACE and the control group, a-HAIC demonstrated greater benefits in preventing tumor recurrence and improving survival in HCC patients with MVI.<br/><br/>","PeriodicalId":15906,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hepatocellular Carcinoma","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy vs Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization as Adjuvant Therapy Following Surgery for MVI-Positive Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Propensity Score Matching Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Yuhua Wen, Lianghe Lu, Jie Mei, Yihong Ling, Renguo Guan, Wenping Lin, Wei Wei, Rongping Guo\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/jhc.s453250\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<strong>Background:</strong> Microvascular invasion (MVI) is a significant pathological feature in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), adjuvant hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (a-HAIC) and adjuvant transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (a-TACE), are commonly used for HCC patients with MVI. This study aims to evaluate the efficacies of two adjuvant therapies after surgical treatment for HCC, compare them, and identify the significant factors.<br/><strong>Methods:</strong> Clinical data from two randomized controlled trials involving HCC patients with MVI after surgical treatment were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance baseline differences between patients who received a-HAIC or a-TACE, and control groups who underwent hepatectomy alone. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were compared.<br/><strong>Results:</strong> In total of 549 patients were collected from two randomized controlled trials. Using the PSM and Kaplan-Meier method, the median DFS of the a-HAIC, a-TACE, and control groups was 63.2, 21.7, and 11.2 months (<em>P&lt;</em> 0.05). The a-HAIC group show significantly better 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates compared to the a-TACE and control groups (96.3%, 80.0%, 72.8% vs 84.4%, 57.0%, 29.8% vs 84.5%, 62.8%, 53.4%, P&lt; 0.05). But the OS rates of a-TACE and control groups showed no significant difference (<em>P</em>=0.279). Multivariate analysis identified a-HAIC (HR=0.449, <em>P</em>=0.000) and a-TACE (HR=0.633, <em>P</em>=0.007) as independent protective factors. For OS, a-HAIC (HR=0.388, <em>P</em>=0.003) was identified as an independent protective factor, too.<br/><strong>Conclusion:</strong> Compared to a-TACE and the control group, a-HAIC demonstrated greater benefits in preventing tumor recurrence and improving survival in HCC patients with MVI.<br/><br/>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15906,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hepatocellular Carcinoma\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hepatocellular Carcinoma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/jhc.s453250\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hepatocellular Carcinoma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/jhc.s453250","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:微血管侵犯(MVI)是肝细胞癌(HCC)的一个重要病理特征,辅助肝动脉灌注化疗(a-HAIC)和辅助经导管动脉化疗栓塞(a-TACE)常用于有MVI的HCC患者。本研究旨在评估 HCC 手术治疗后两种辅助疗法的疗效,对其进行比较,并找出其中的重要因素:方法:回顾性研究了两项随机对照试验的临床数据,这些试验涉及手术治疗后伴有MVI的HCC患者。进行倾向评分匹配(PSM)分析,以平衡接受a-HAIC或a-TACE治疗的患者与仅接受肝切除术的对照组之间的基线差异。比较了无病生存率(DFS)和总生存率(OS):结果:两项随机对照试验共收集了 549 例患者。采用 PSM 和 Kaplan-Meier 法,a-HAIC 组、a-TACE 组和对照组的中位无病生存期分别为 63.2 个月、21.7 个月和 11.2 个月(P< 0.05)。与a-TACE组和对照组相比,a-HAIC组的1年、3年和5年OS率明显更高(96.3%、80.0%、72.8% vs 84.4%、57.0%、29.8% vs 84.5%、62.8%、53.4%,P< 0.05)。但a-TACE组与对照组的OS率无明显差异(P=0.279)。多变量分析发现,a-HAIC(HR=0.449,P=0.000)和a-TACE(HR=0.633,P=0.007)是独立的保护因素。对于OS,a-HAIC(HR=0.388,P=0.003)也被认为是一个独立的保护因素:结论:与 a-TACE 和对照组相比,a-HAIC 在预防肿瘤复发和改善 MVI HCC 患者的生存率方面具有更大的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy vs Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization as Adjuvant Therapy Following Surgery for MVI-Positive Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Propensity Score Matching Analysis
Background: Microvascular invasion (MVI) is a significant pathological feature in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), adjuvant hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (a-HAIC) and adjuvant transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (a-TACE), are commonly used for HCC patients with MVI. This study aims to evaluate the efficacies of two adjuvant therapies after surgical treatment for HCC, compare them, and identify the significant factors.
Methods: Clinical data from two randomized controlled trials involving HCC patients with MVI after surgical treatment were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance baseline differences between patients who received a-HAIC or a-TACE, and control groups who underwent hepatectomy alone. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were compared.
Results: In total of 549 patients were collected from two randomized controlled trials. Using the PSM and Kaplan-Meier method, the median DFS of the a-HAIC, a-TACE, and control groups was 63.2, 21.7, and 11.2 months (P< 0.05). The a-HAIC group show significantly better 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates compared to the a-TACE and control groups (96.3%, 80.0%, 72.8% vs 84.4%, 57.0%, 29.8% vs 84.5%, 62.8%, 53.4%, P< 0.05). But the OS rates of a-TACE and control groups showed no significant difference (P=0.279). Multivariate analysis identified a-HAIC (HR=0.449, P=0.000) and a-TACE (HR=0.633, P=0.007) as independent protective factors. For OS, a-HAIC (HR=0.388, P=0.003) was identified as an independent protective factor, too.
Conclusion: Compared to a-TACE and the control group, a-HAIC demonstrated greater benefits in preventing tumor recurrence and improving survival in HCC patients with MVI.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
2.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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