BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of doxorubicin-eluting beads combined with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) compared with conventional TACE (cTACE). METHODOLOGY: PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched for articles published to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating efficacy and side effects between DEB-TACE and cTACE. The RR (relative risk) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated by the Revman 5.0 software. RESULTS: Totally 4 studies, including 527 patients, compared the efficacy and safety of DEB-TACE with cTACE. The DEB-TACE achieved fewer side effects in alopecia (p = 0.0002, RR = 0.05, 95% CI: 0.01-0.24) and myelosuppression (p = 0.009, RR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.14-0.75). Meanwhile, there was no significant difference in efficacy evaluation including complete response (p = 0.16, RR = 1.36, 95% CI: 0.89-2.08), partial response (p = 0.48, RR = 1.14, 95% CI: 0.80-1.62), stable disease (p = 0.73, RR = 0.93,95% CI: 0.60-1.40), progressive disease (p 0.19, RR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.56-1.12), objective response (p = 0.26, RR 0.91, 95% CI: 0.48-1.72) and disease control (p = 0.05, RR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.00-1.39). CONCLUSIONS: DEB-TACE shows similar therapeutic efficacy to cTACE method and fewer adverse events.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of doxorubicin-eluting beads combined with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) compared with conventional TACE (cTACE). METHODOLOGY: PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched for articles published to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating efficacy and side effects between DEB-TACE and cTACE. The RR (relative risk) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated by the Revman 5.0 software. RESULTS: Totally 4 studies, including 527 patients, compared the efficacy and safety of DEB-TACE with cTACE. The DEB-TACE achieved fewer side effects in alopecia (p = 0.0002, RR = 0.05, 95% CI: 0.01-0.24) and myelosuppression (p = 0.009, RR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.14-0.75). Meanwhile, there was no significant difference in efficacy evaluation including complete response (p = 0.16, RR = 1.36, 95% CI: 0.89-2.08), partial response (p = 0.48, RR = 1.14, 95% CI: 0.80-1.62), stable disease (p = 0.73, RR = 0.93,95% CI: 0.60-1.40), progressive disease (p 0.19, RR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.56-1.12), objective response (p = 0.26, RR 0.91, 95% CI: 0.48-1.72) and disease control (p = 0.05, RR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.00-1.39). CONCLUSIONS: DEB-TACE shows similar therapeutic efficacy to cTACE method and fewer adverse events.
Authors: Waleed Fateen; Farooq Khan; Richard J O'Neill; Martin W James; Stephen D Ryder; Guruprasad P Aithal Journal: J Hepatocell Carcinoma Date: 2017-10-16
Authors: Götz Richter; Boris Radeleff; Christian Stroszczynski; Philippe Pereira; Thomas Helmberger; Mark Barakat; Peter Huppert Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2017-11-22 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Neehar D Parikh; Peng Zhang; Amit G Singal; Brian A Derstine; Venkat Krishnamurthy; Pranab Barman; Akbar K Waljee; Grace L Su Journal: Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 4.679
Authors: Guohong Han; Sarah Berhane; Hidenori Toyoda; Dominik Bettinger; Omar Elshaarawy; Anthony W H Chan; Martha Kirstein; Cristina Mosconi; Florian Hucke; Daniel Palmer; David J Pinato; Rohini Sharma; Diego Ottaviani; Jeong W Jang; Tim A Labeur; Otto M van Delden; Mario Pirisi; Nick Stern; Bruno Sangro; Tim Meyer; Waleed Fateen; Marta García-Fiñana; Asmaa Gomaa; Imam Waked; Eman Rewisha; Guru P Aithal; Simon Travis; Masatoshi Kudo; Alessandro Cucchetti; Markus Peck-Radosavljevic; R B Takkenberg; Stephen L Chan; Arndt Vogel; Philip J Johnson Journal: Hepatology Date: 2020-05-27 Impact factor: 17.425