Yu-Hui Huang1, Benjamin V Park1, Yi-Fan Chen2, Ron C Gaba1, Grace Guzman3, R Peter Lokken4. 1. Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, University of Illinois Health, Chicago, Illinois. 2. Center for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 3. Department of Pathology, University of Illinois Health, Chicago, Illinois. 4. Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Avenue, M-361, San Francisco, CA 94143. Electronic address: rpeter.lokken@ucsf.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare outcomes of unresectable hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (HCC-CC) with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after locoregional therapy (LRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with histologically confirmed HCC-CC or HCC treated with LRT between 2007 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Ten patients (8 men; median age, 60 y) with 12 HCC-CCs (mean diameter, 4.2 cm ± 1.9; mean number, 3.7 ± 3.3) treated with chemoembolization (n = 6), yttrium-90 radioembolization (n = 2), RF ablation (n = 1), or chemoembolization/RF ablation (n = 1) were compared with 124 patients (92 men; median age, 59 y) with 134 HCCs (mean diameter, 4.8 cm ± 4.0; mean number, 2.6 ± 2.2) treated with chemoembolization (n = 51), yttrium-90 radioembolization (n = 17), RF ablation (n = 41), or chemoembolization/RF ablation (n = 15). Propensity score-matched analysis with conditional logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, LRT modality, tumor-specific features, and Child-Pugh class. Tumor-volume doubling time (TVDT) before LRT and objective response rates were compared by Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher exact test; progression-free survival (PFS) and transplant-free survival (TFS) were compared by Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: On univariate analysis, HCC-CC was associated with lower median TVDT (2.4 months vs 5.2 months, P = .03), objective response (30% vs 71%, P = .01), and median PFS (2.4 months vs 7.4 months, HR 4.3, 95% CI 2.2-8.4, P < .0001). Propensity score-matched analysis demonstrated greater distant progression (60% vs 30%, P = .003) and significantly shorter median PFS (2.4 months vs 6.0 months, HR 3.3, 95% CI 1.3-8.9, P = .017) for HCC-CC. No significant difference was observed in TFS (7.5 months vs 13.8 months, HR 1.5, 95% CI 0.4-6.1). CONCLUSIONS: HCC-CC was associated with reduced PFS and greater distant progression after LRT compared with HCC, indicating a need for adjunctive treatment strategies to improve outcomes.
PURPOSE: To compare outcomes of unresectable hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (HCC-CC) with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after locoregional therapy (LRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with histologically confirmed HCC-CC or HCC treated with LRT between 2007 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Ten patients (8 men; median age, 60 y) with 12 HCC-CCs (mean diameter, 4.2 cm ± 1.9; mean number, 3.7 ± 3.3) treated with chemoembolization (n = 6), yttrium-90 radioembolization (n = 2), RF ablation (n = 1), or chemoembolization/RF ablation (n = 1) were compared with 124 patients (92 men; median age, 59 y) with 134 HCCs (mean diameter, 4.8 cm ± 4.0; mean number, 2.6 ± 2.2) treated with chemoembolization (n = 51), yttrium-90 radioembolization (n = 17), RF ablation (n = 41), or chemoembolization/RF ablation (n = 15). Propensity score-matched analysis with conditional logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, LRT modality, tumor-specific features, and Child-Pugh class. Tumor-volume doubling time (TVDT) before LRT and objective response rates were compared by Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher exact test; progression-free survival (PFS) and transplant-free survival (TFS) were compared by Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: On univariate analysis, HCC-CC was associated with lower median TVDT (2.4 months vs 5.2 months, P = .03), objective response (30% vs 71%, P = .01), and median PFS (2.4 months vs 7.4 months, HR 4.3, 95% CI 2.2-8.4, P < .0001). Propensity score-matched analysis demonstrated greater distant progression (60% vs 30%, P = .003) and significantly shorter median PFS (2.4 months vs 6.0 months, HR 3.3, 95% CI 1.3-8.9, P = .017) for HCC-CC. No significant difference was observed in TFS (7.5 months vs 13.8 months, HR 1.5, 95% CI 0.4-6.1). CONCLUSIONS: HCC-CC was associated with reduced PFS and greater distant progression after LRT compared with HCC, indicating a need for adjunctive treatment strategies to improve outcomes.