B M Aarts1,2, F M Gómez Muñoz3,4, H Wildiers5, V O Dezentjé6, T R Baetens3, W Schats7, M Lopez-Yurda7, R C Dresen8, B J de Wit-van der Veen9, C M Deroose10, G Maleux8, R G H Beets-Tan3,11, E G Klompenhouwer3. 1. Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. b.aarts@nki.nl. 2. GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands. b.aarts@nki.nl. 3. Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Interventional Radiology, Hospital Clinic Universitari de Barcelona, Carrer de Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain. 5. General Medical Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. 6. Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 8. Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. 9. Nuclear Medicine, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 10. Nuclear Medicine, Department of Imaging and Pathology, University Hospitals Leuven & Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. 11. GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Performing a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the evidence of intra-arterial therapies in liver metastatic breast cancer (LMBC) patients. METHODS: A systemic literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS for studies regarding intra-arterial therapies in LMBC patients. Full text studies of LMBC patients (n ≥ 10) published between January 2010 and December 2020 were included when at least one outcome among response rate, adverse events or survival was available. Response rates were pooled using generalized linear mixed models. A weighted estimate of the population median overall survival (OS) was obtained under the assumption of exponentially distributed survival times. RESULTS: A total of 26 studies (1266 patients) were included. Eleven articles reported on transarterial radioembolization (TARE), ten on transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and four on chemo-infusion. One retrospective study compared TARE and TACE. Pooled response rates were 49% for TARE (95%CI 32-67%), 34% for TACE (95%CI 22-50%) and 19% for chemo-infusion (95%CI 14-25%). Pooled median survival was 9.2 months (range 6.1-35.4 months) for TARE, 17.8 months (range 4.6-47.0) for TACE and 7.9 months (range 7.0-14.2) for chemo-infusion. No comparison for OS was possible due to missing survival rates at specific time points (1 and 2 year OS) and the large heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Although results have to be interpreted with caution due to the large heterogeneity, the superior response rate of TARE and TACE compared to chemo-infusion suggests first choice of TARE or TACE in chemorefractory LMBC patients. Chemo-infusion could be considered in LMBC patients not suitable for TARE or TACE. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3a.
PURPOSE: Performing a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the evidence of intra-arterial therapies in liver metastatic breast cancer (LMBC) patients. METHODS: A systemic literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS for studies regarding intra-arterial therapies in LMBC patients. Full text studies of LMBC patients (n ≥ 10) published between January 2010 and December 2020 were included when at least one outcome among response rate, adverse events or survival was available. Response rates were pooled using generalized linear mixed models. A weighted estimate of the population median overall survival (OS) was obtained under the assumption of exponentially distributed survival times. RESULTS: A total of 26 studies (1266 patients) were included. Eleven articles reported on transarterial radioembolization (TARE), ten on transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and four on chemo-infusion. One retrospective study compared TARE and TACE. Pooled response rates were 49% for TARE (95%CI 32-67%), 34% for TACE (95%CI 22-50%) and 19% for chemo-infusion (95%CI 14-25%). Pooled median survival was 9.2 months (range 6.1-35.4 months) for TARE, 17.8 months (range 4.6-47.0) for TACE and 7.9 months (range 7.0-14.2) for chemo-infusion. No comparison for OS was possible due to missing survival rates at specific time points (1 and 2 year OS) and the large heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Although results have to be interpreted with caution due to the large heterogeneity, the superior response rate of TARE and TACE compared to chemo-infusion suggests first choice of TARE or TACE in chemorefractory LMBC patients. Chemo-infusion could be considered in LMBC patients not suitable for TARE or TACE. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3a.
Authors: Lee Guek Eng; Shaheenah Dawood; Victoria Sopik; Benjamin Haaland; Pui San Tan; Nirmala Bhoo-Pathy; Ellen Warner; Javaid Iqbal; Steven A Narod; Rebecca Dent Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-09-14 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: R Cianni; G Pelle; E Notarianni; A Saltarelli; P Rabuffi; O Bagni; L Filippi; E Cortesi Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-07-27 Impact factor: 5.315