Gyoung Min Kim, Do Young Kim, Jong Yun Won, Sungmo Moon, Seung Up Kim, Beom Kyung Kim
{"title":"经动脉放射栓塞治疗肝细胞癌的疗效:玻璃微球与树脂微球。","authors":"Gyoung Min Kim, Do Young Kim, Jong Yun Won, Sungmo Moon, Seung Up Kim, Beom Kyung Kim","doi":"10.1007/s00270-024-03726-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the treatment outcomes of glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and evaluate the prognostic factors that influence the outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed 251 consecutive patients who underwent radioembolization for the treatment of HCC at a single tertiary center. Imaging responses after radioembolization were evaluated using the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify the prognostic factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 195 patients were included in this study (glass microsphere, n = 75; resin microsphere, n = 120). The complete and objective response rates were 16.0% and 50.7% in the glass microsphere group and 17.5% and 58.3% in the resin microsphere group, respectively. Median PFS was 241 days in the glass microsphere group and 268 days in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.871). Median OS was 29 months in the glass microsphere group and 40 months in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.669). The only significant prognostic factor was bilobar tumor distribution, which favored resin microspheres (p = 0.023). Procedure-related adverse events occurred more frequently in the resin microsphere group (glass, 2.7% vs. resin, 5.0%; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of HCC did not show a significant difference in survival, though major adverse events occurred more frequently with the use of resin microspheres.</p>","PeriodicalId":9591,"journal":{"name":"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcome of Transarterial Radioembolization in the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Glass Versus Resin Microsphere.\",\"authors\":\"Gyoung Min Kim, Do Young Kim, Jong Yun Won, Sungmo Moon, Seung Up Kim, Beom Kyung Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00270-024-03726-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the treatment outcomes of glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and evaluate the prognostic factors that influence the outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed 251 consecutive patients who underwent radioembolization for the treatment of HCC at a single tertiary center. Imaging responses after radioembolization were evaluated using the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify the prognostic factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 195 patients were included in this study (glass microsphere, n = 75; resin microsphere, n = 120). The complete and objective response rates were 16.0% and 50.7% in the glass microsphere group and 17.5% and 58.3% in the resin microsphere group, respectively. Median PFS was 241 days in the glass microsphere group and 268 days in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.871). Median OS was 29 months in the glass microsphere group and 40 months in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.669). The only significant prognostic factor was bilobar tumor distribution, which favored resin microspheres (p = 0.023). Procedure-related adverse events occurred more frequently in the resin microsphere group (glass, 2.7% vs. resin, 5.0%; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of HCC did not show a significant difference in survival, though major adverse events occurred more frequently with the use of resin microspheres.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9591,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-024-03726-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-024-03726-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Outcome of Transarterial Radioembolization in the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Glass Versus Resin Microsphere.
Purpose: To compare the treatment outcomes of glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and evaluate the prognostic factors that influence the outcomes.
Materials and methods: We retrospectively reviewed 251 consecutive patients who underwent radioembolization for the treatment of HCC at a single tertiary center. Imaging responses after radioembolization were evaluated using the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify the prognostic factors.
Results: A total of 195 patients were included in this study (glass microsphere, n = 75; resin microsphere, n = 120). The complete and objective response rates were 16.0% and 50.7% in the glass microsphere group and 17.5% and 58.3% in the resin microsphere group, respectively. Median PFS was 241 days in the glass microsphere group and 268 days in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.871). Median OS was 29 months in the glass microsphere group and 40 months in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.669). The only significant prognostic factor was bilobar tumor distribution, which favored resin microspheres (p = 0.023). Procedure-related adverse events occurred more frequently in the resin microsphere group (glass, 2.7% vs. resin, 5.0%; p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of HCC did not show a significant difference in survival, though major adverse events occurred more frequently with the use of resin microspheres.
期刊介绍:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology (CVIR) is the official journal of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe, and is also the official organ of a number of additional distinguished national and international interventional radiological societies. CVIR publishes double blinded peer-reviewed original research work including clinical and laboratory investigations, technical notes, case reports, works in progress, and letters to the editor, as well as review articles, pictorial essays, editorials, and special invited submissions in the field of vascular and interventional radiology. Beside the communication of the latest research results in this field, it is also the aim of CVIR to support continuous medical education. Articles that are accepted for publication are done so with the understanding that they, or their substantive contents, have not been and will not be submitted to any other publication.