化疗栓塞作为包膜下单个小(≤3cm)肝细胞癌的替代治疗:倾向评分分析

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Gayoung Jeon, Jin Hyoung Kim, Eunbyeol Ko, So Yeon Kim, Dong Il Gwon, Ji Hoon Shin, Jungbok Lee
{"title":"化疗栓塞作为包膜下单个小(≤3cm)肝细胞癌的替代治疗:倾向评分分析","authors":"Gayoung Jeon, Jin Hyoung Kim, Eunbyeol Ko, So Yeon Kim, Dong Il Gwon, Ji Hoon Shin, Jungbok Lee","doi":"10.1177/02841851251355588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundRadiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a first-line therapy for early-stage, single, small (≤3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) tumors; however, adequate control of subcapsular HCC by RFA remains challenging due to the higher risk of major complications and local tumor recurrence than non-subcapsular HCC.PurposeTo compare safety and efficacy of conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) and RFA as treatments for single, small (≤3 cm) HCC with a subcapsular location.Material and MethodsBetween 2008 and 2017, 717 treatment-naïve patients who underwent cTACE (n = 362) or RFA (n = 355) as a first-line treatment for single, small (≤3 cm), subcapsular HCC were enrolled. Propensity score analysis using inverse probability weighting (IPW) was applied to reduce the effect of potential confounding factors.ResultsThe median follow-up time was 87 months. After propensity score analysis using IPW, the 15-year overall survival rates in the cTACE and RFA groups were 47% and 45%, respectively (<i>P</i> = 0.89). The 15-year time to local tumor recurrence rates were 55% and 71%, respectively (<i>P</i> <0.001), and the 15-year time to recurrence rates were 29% and 30%, respectively (<i>P</i> = 0.18). The rates of major complication associated with cTACE and RFA after IPW were 1% and 4%, respectively (<i>P</i> = 0.01).ConclusioncTACE is a viable alternative to RFA for treating subcapsular HCCs measuring ≤3 cm, with a comparable overall survival rate and fewer major complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":7143,"journal":{"name":"Acta radiologica","volume":" ","pages":"2841851251355588"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Chemoembolization as an alternative treatment for single, small (≤3 cm) hepatocellular carcinomas with subcapsular location: a propensity score analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Gayoung Jeon, Jin Hyoung Kim, Eunbyeol Ko, So Yeon Kim, Dong Il Gwon, Ji Hoon Shin, Jungbok Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02841851251355588\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>BackgroundRadiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a first-line therapy for early-stage, single, small (≤3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) tumors; however, adequate control of subcapsular HCC by RFA remains challenging due to the higher risk of major complications and local tumor recurrence than non-subcapsular HCC.PurposeTo compare safety and efficacy of conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) and RFA as treatments for single, small (≤3 cm) HCC with a subcapsular location.Material and MethodsBetween 2008 and 2017, 717 treatment-naïve patients who underwent cTACE (n = 362) or RFA (n = 355) as a first-line treatment for single, small (≤3 cm), subcapsular HCC were enrolled. Propensity score analysis using inverse probability weighting (IPW) was applied to reduce the effect of potential confounding factors.ResultsThe median follow-up time was 87 months. After propensity score analysis using IPW, the 15-year overall survival rates in the cTACE and RFA groups were 47% and 45%, respectively (<i>P</i> = 0.89). The 15-year time to local tumor recurrence rates were 55% and 71%, respectively (<i>P</i> <0.001), and the 15-year time to recurrence rates were 29% and 30%, respectively (<i>P</i> = 0.18). The rates of major complication associated with cTACE and RFA after IPW were 1% and 4%, respectively (<i>P</i> = 0.01).ConclusioncTACE is a viable alternative to RFA for treating subcapsular HCCs measuring ≤3 cm, with a comparable overall survival rate and fewer major complications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7143,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta radiologica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2841851251355588\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta radiologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02841851251355588\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta radiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02841851251355588","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:射频消融术(RFA)是早期单发小(≤3cm)肝细胞癌(HCC)的一线治疗方法;然而,由于主要并发症和局部肿瘤复发的风险高于非包膜下HCC, RFA对包膜下HCC的充分控制仍然具有挑战性。目的比较传统经动脉化疗栓塞(cTACE)与RFA治疗单发小(≤3cm)包膜下肝癌的安全性和有效性。材料和方法在2008年至2017年期间,纳入了717例treatment-naïve患者,他们接受了cTACE (n = 362)或RFA (n = 355)作为单发、小(≤3cm)的包膜下HCC的一线治疗。采用逆概率加权(IPW)倾向得分分析来降低潜在混杂因素的影响。结果中位随访时间为87个月。使用IPW进行倾向评分分析后,cTACE组和RFA组的15年总生存率分别为47%和45% (P = 0.89)。15年局部肿瘤复发率分别为55%和71% (P = 0.18)。IPW后与cTACE和RFA相关的主要并发症发生率分别为1%和4% (P = 0.01)。结论ctace是治疗≤3cm包膜下hcc的可行替代方案,总生存率相当,主要并发症较少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Chemoembolization as an alternative treatment for single, small (≤3 cm) hepatocellular carcinomas with subcapsular location: a propensity score analysis.

BackgroundRadiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a first-line therapy for early-stage, single, small (≤3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) tumors; however, adequate control of subcapsular HCC by RFA remains challenging due to the higher risk of major complications and local tumor recurrence than non-subcapsular HCC.PurposeTo compare safety and efficacy of conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) and RFA as treatments for single, small (≤3 cm) HCC with a subcapsular location.Material and MethodsBetween 2008 and 2017, 717 treatment-naïve patients who underwent cTACE (n = 362) or RFA (n = 355) as a first-line treatment for single, small (≤3 cm), subcapsular HCC were enrolled. Propensity score analysis using inverse probability weighting (IPW) was applied to reduce the effect of potential confounding factors.ResultsThe median follow-up time was 87 months. After propensity score analysis using IPW, the 15-year overall survival rates in the cTACE and RFA groups were 47% and 45%, respectively (P = 0.89). The 15-year time to local tumor recurrence rates were 55% and 71%, respectively (P <0.001), and the 15-year time to recurrence rates were 29% and 30%, respectively (P = 0.18). The rates of major complication associated with cTACE and RFA after IPW were 1% and 4%, respectively (P = 0.01).ConclusioncTACE is a viable alternative to RFA for treating subcapsular HCCs measuring ≤3 cm, with a comparable overall survival rate and fewer major complications.

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
Acta radiologica
Acta radiologica 医学-核医学
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
170
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Radiologica publishes articles on all aspects of radiology, from clinical radiology to experimental work. It is known for articles based on experimental work and contrast media research, giving priority to scientific original papers. The distinguished international editorial board also invite review articles, short communications and technical and instrumental notes.
×
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