| Literature DB >> 34804911 |
Constantine Frangakis1, Jae Ho Sohn2, Ahmet Bas2,3, Julius Chapiro2,4, Ruediger E Schernthaner2, MingDe Lin2,4, James P Hamilton5, Timothy M Pawlik6, Kelvin Hong2, Rafael Duran2,7.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Investigate long-term effects of repeated transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) on portal venous pressure (PVP) using non-invasive surrogate markers of portal hypertension.Entities:
Keywords: HCC; TACE; hepatocellular carcinoma; longitudinal data analysis; portal hypertension; transarterial chemoembolization; variceal bleeding
Year: 2021 PMID: 34804911 PMCID: PMC8602787 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.639235
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 6.244
Baseline Patient and TACEs Characteristics.
| Characteristic | HCC group | Metastatic group |
|---|---|---|
| Value (%) | Value (%) | |
| No. of Patients | 57 | 42 |
| Sex | ||
|
Female | 14 (24.6) | 25 (59.5) |
|
Male | 43 (75.4) | 17 (40.5) |
| Age* | ||
|
All patients | 62 (12.1) [range, 19-85] | 57 (11.5) [range, 19-80] |
|
Female | 61 (9.3) [range, 46-80] | 55 (12.4) [range, 19-74] |
|
Male | 62 (13.0) [range, 19-85] | 59 (9.7) [range, 42-80] |
| Ethnicity | ||
|
White | 33 (57.9) | 40 (95.2) |
|
African American | 10 (17.5) | 2 (4.8) |
|
Hispanic | 2 (3.5) | 0 (0) |
|
Other | 12 (21.1) | 0 (0) |
| ECOG Performance Status | ||
|
Grade 0 | 26 (45.6) | 25 (59.5) |
|
Grade 1 | 24 (42.1) | 17 (40.5) |
|
Grade 2 | 7 (12.3) | 0 (0) |
| Etiology | ||
|
HCV | 15 (26.3) | |
|
HBV | 14 (24.6) | |
|
Cryptogenic | 11 (19.3) | |
|
HVC+EtOH | 8 (14.0) | |
|
EtOH | 5 (8.8) | |
|
NASH | 3 (5.3) | |
|
Hemochromatosis | 1 (1.8) | |
|
Neuroendocrine tumor | 26 (61.8) | |
|
Breast cancer | 7 (16.7) | |
|
Sarcoma | 7 (16.7) | |
|
Pancreatic cancer | 1 (2.4) | |
|
Colorectal cancer | 1 (2.4) | |
| Child-Pugh Class | ||
|
A | 42 (73.7) | 40 (95.2) |
|
B | 14 (24.6) | 2 (4.8) |
|
C | 1 (1.7) | 0 (0) |
| Child-Pugh Score* | 6 (1.2) [range, 5-10] | 5 (0.55) [range, 5-7] |
| MELD score* | 6 (3.5) [range, 0-16] | NA |
| Biopsy Proven HCC/Metastasis | 29 (50.9) | 42 (100) |
| Alpha-fetoprotein* | 6477 (39820) [range, 1-300308] | NA |
| Number of Tumors* | 2.7 (3.9) [range, 1-25] | 35.6 (42.4) [range, 2-224] |
| Largest Tumor [cm]* | 8.2 (4.2) [range, 2.7-20.2] | 7.6 (3.9) [range, 2.1-18.4] |
| Total Tumor Size [cm]*‡ | 13.7 (13.7) [range, 2.7-75.4] | 88.8 (123.8) [range, 3.6-696.8] |
| Portal Vein Thrombosis | 3 (5.3) | 5 (8.4) |
| Total TACE procedures | 170 | 109 |
|
cTACE | 145 (85.3) | 87 (79.8) |
|
DEB-TACE | 25 (14.7) | 22 (20.2) |
| Treatment Modality | ||
|
cTACE only | 43 (75.4) | 30 (71.4) |
|
DEB-TACE only | 5 (8.8) | 7 (16.7) |
|
Crossover | 9 (15.8) | 5 (11.9) |
| Position of microcatheter (all TACEs) | ||
|
Proper hepatic artery | 3 (5.3) | 2 (4.8) |
|
Right or left hepatic artery | 40 (70.2) | 35 (83.3) |
|
Other (sectorial, sub-segmental or segmental) | 14 (24.5) | 5 (11.9) |
| Child-Pugh Class evolution (baseline→end of follow-up) | ||
|
A→A | 26 (45.6) | 29 (69) |
|
A→B | 14 (24.6) | 11 (26.2) |
|
A→C | 2 (3.5) | 0 |
|
B→B | 10 (17.5) | 2 (4.8) |
|
B→C | 4 (7) | 0 |
|
C→C | 1 (1.8) | 0 |
Except where indicated, data represents numbers of patients with percentages in parentheses. *Data represented as mean (standard deviation) and range. ‡Obtained by adding all liver lesions. NA, not applicable.
Longitudinal analysis of platelets and spleen volume.
| A | Average (+ change) of Platelet Values | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| visits 0-1 used | all visits used | |||||
| Estimate | 95%CI |
| Estimate | 95%CI |
| |
| for MET group at visit 0, with unstable Child-Pugh | 239 | 215:263 | ||||
| + HCC group | -58 | -101:-16 | 0.007 | |||
| + stable Child-Pugh | – | – | – | |||
| + additional visit | ||||||
| If MET, any Child-Pugh | 72 | 26:117 | 0.002 | 0 | -20:19 | 0.978 |
| If HCC, any Child-Pugh | 0 | -18:19 | 0.978 | -4 | -13:4 | 0.336 |
| + 1 sd of Total tumor size at baseline | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| + vascular invasion | – | – | – | – | – | – |
|
|
| |||||
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| for MET group at visit 0, with unstable Child-Pugh | 226 | 192:261 | ||||
| + HCC group | 204 | 125:282 | <0.001 | |||
| + stable Child-Pugh | – | – | – | |||
| + additional visit | 20 | 8:32 | 0.001 | 16 | -3:36 | 0.099 |
| If MET, any Child-Pugh | ||||||
| If HCC, any Child-Pugh | (same as MET) | (same as MET) | ||||
| + 1 sd of Total tumor size at baseline | 23 | -1:48 | 0.064 | – | – | – |
| + vascular invasion | -23 | -118:72 | 0.635 | – | – | – |
Child-Pugh Stability, Visit: Child-Pugh Stability, Largest Tumor Size at Baseline, Number of Tumors at Baseline, TACE type, Microcatheter Location, AFP, MELD and ECOG dropped during model selection per AIC; dashed lines indicate that the corresponding variable was selected out by the model selection process as unimportant. Visit = TACE procedure.
Figure 1Trajectory plot illustrating longitudinal changes over time in platelet count according to the number of TACEs and stratified by Child-Pugh (CP) stability (line = stable, dotted line = unstable) and metastatic (MET)/HCC groups. Line thickness is proportional to patient number (the thicker the line the more patients).
Figure 2Trajectory plot illustrating longitudinal changes over time in spleen volume according to the number of TACEs and stratified by Child-Pugh (CP) stability (line = stable, dotted line = unstable) and metastatic (MET)/HCC groups, respectively. Line thickness is proportional to patient number (the thicker the line the more patients).
Longitudinal analysis of ascites and portosystemic collaterals formation.
| A | Odds (+ Odds Ratios) of Having Moderate/Severe Ascites | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| visits 0-1 used | all visits used | |||||
| Estimate | 95%CI |
| Estimate | 95%CI |
| |
| for MET group at visit 0, with unstable Child-Pugh | 0.0 | 0.0:0.1 | – | |||
| + HCC group | – | – | – | |||
| + stable Child-Pugh | 0.9 | 0.1:5.8 | 0.931 | |||
| + additional visit | ||||||
| If MET, any Child-Pugh | 2.5 | 0.6:9.7 | 0.198 | 0.5 | 0.3:0.9 | 0.014 |
| If HCC, unstable Child-Pugh | 1.7 | 0.1:20.8 | 0.685 | 1.5 | 1.2:1.9 | <0.001 |
| If HCC, stable Child-Pugh | 1.8 | 0.2:13.8 | 0.560 | 1.0 | 0.8:1.4 | 0.756 |
| + ECOG | – | – | – | – | – | – |
|
|
| |||||
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| for MET group at visit 0, with unstable Child-Pugh | 0.0 | 0.0:0.3 | ||||
| + HCC group | 1.4 | 0.9:1.8 | <0.001 | |||
| + stable Child-Pugh | 0.2 | -0.1:0.6 | 0.157 | |||
| + additional visit | ||||||
| If MET, any Child-Pugh | 0.0 | 0.0:0.1 | 0.195 | 0.0 | -0.1:0.1 | 0.913 |
| If HCC, unstable Child-Pugh | -0.2 | -0.1:0.6 | 0.155 | 0.2 | 0.1:0.4 | 0.008 |
| If HCC, stable Child-Pugh | -0.1 | -0.2:0.1 | 0.269 | 0.0 | -0.2:0.2 | 0.976 |
| + ECOG | 0.4 | -0.1:0.9 | 0.084 | – | – | – |
Total Tumor Size at Baseline (normalized), Largest Tumor Size at Baseline (normalized), Number of Tumors at Baseline, TACE type, Microcatheter Location, Vascular Invasion, AFP and MELD dropped during model selection per AIC; dashed lines indicate that the corresponding variable was selected out by the model selection process as unimportant. Visit = TACE procedure.
Figure 3Scatter plot illustrating longitudinal changes over time in the development of moderate/severe ascites according to the number of TACEs and stratified by Child-Pugh (CP) stability (line = stable, dotted line = unstable) and metastatic (MET)/HCC groups. Each small shape (Δ or O) represents a patient’s presence at a TACE. Shapes are jittered for visualization purposes to avoid cluttering on top of each other. The linear time model in the log(Probability)/(1-log(Probability)) scale shows as a curve (nonlinear) model in the Probability scale.
Figure 4Scatter plot illustrating longitudinal changes over time in the number of portosystemic collaterals locations according to the number of TACEs and stratified by Child-Pugh (CP) stability (line = stable, dotted line = unstable) and metastatic (MET)/HCC groups. Each small shape (Δ or O) represents a patient’s presence at a TACE. Shapes are jittered for visualization purposes to avoid cluttering on top of each other. The linear time model in the log(Probability)/(1-log(Probability)) scale shows as a curve (nonlinear) model in the Probability scale.