Background:Transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation (TACE) is the treatment of choice for intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Doxorubicin-loaded drug-eluting beads (DEB)-TACE is expected to improve the performance of conventional TACE (cTACE). The aim of this study was to compare DEB-TACE with cTACE in terms of time-to-tumour progression (TTP), adverse events (AEs), and 2-year survival.Methods:Patients were randomised one-to-one to undergo cTACE or DEB-TACE and followed-up for at least 2 years or until death. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation was repeated 'on-demand'.Results:We enrolled 177 patients: 89 underwent DEB-TACE and 88 cTACE. The median number of procedures was 2 in each arm, and the in-hospital stay was 3 and 4 days, respectively (P=0.323). No differences were found in local and overall tumour response. The median TTP was 9 months in both arms. The AE incidence and severity did not differ between the arms, except for post-procedural pain, more frequent and severe after cTACE (P<0.001). The 1-and 2-year survival rates were 86.2% and 56.8% after DEB-TACE and 83.5% and 55.4% after cTACE (P=0.949). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG), serum albumin, and tumour number independently predicted survival (P<0.05).Conclusions:The DEB-TACE and the cTACE are equally effective and safe, with the only advantage of DEB-TACE being less post-procedural abdominal pain.

Golfieri, R., Giampalma, E., Renzulli, M., Cioni, R., Bargellini, I., Bartolozzi, C., et al. (2014). Randomised controlled trial of doxorubicin-eluting beads vs conventional chemoembolisation for hepatocellular carcinoma. BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 111(2), 255-264 [10.1038/bjc.2014.199].

Randomised controlled trial of doxorubicin-eluting beads vs conventional chemoembolisation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Fagiuoli S
2014

Abstract

Background:Transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation (TACE) is the treatment of choice for intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Doxorubicin-loaded drug-eluting beads (DEB)-TACE is expected to improve the performance of conventional TACE (cTACE). The aim of this study was to compare DEB-TACE with cTACE in terms of time-to-tumour progression (TTP), adverse events (AEs), and 2-year survival.Methods:Patients were randomised one-to-one to undergo cTACE or DEB-TACE and followed-up for at least 2 years or until death. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation was repeated 'on-demand'.Results:We enrolled 177 patients: 89 underwent DEB-TACE and 88 cTACE. The median number of procedures was 2 in each arm, and the in-hospital stay was 3 and 4 days, respectively (P=0.323). No differences were found in local and overall tumour response. The median TTP was 9 months in both arms. The AE incidence and severity did not differ between the arms, except for post-procedural pain, more frequent and severe after cTACE (P<0.001). The 1-and 2-year survival rates were 86.2% and 56.8% after DEB-TACE and 83.5% and 55.4% after cTACE (P=0.949). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG), serum albumin, and tumour number independently predicted survival (P<0.05).Conclusions:The DEB-TACE and the cTACE are equally effective and safe, with the only advantage of DEB-TACE being less post-procedural abdominal pain.
Articolo in rivista - Articolo scientifico
intra-arterial hepatic therapy; liver cancer; mRECIST; survival;
English
2014
111
2
255
264
reserved
Golfieri, R., Giampalma, E., Renzulli, M., Cioni, R., Bargellini, I., Bartolozzi, C., et al. (2014). Randomised controlled trial of doxorubicin-eluting beads vs conventional chemoembolisation for hepatocellular carcinoma. BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 111(2), 255-264 [10.1038/bjc.2014.199].
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Golfieri 2015bjc2014199a.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Dimensione 379.82 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
379.82 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10281/353838
Citazioni
  • Scopus 435
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 416
Social impact