| Literature DB >> 34805876 |
Mingjun Bai1,2, Tao Pan1,2, Churen Zhou1,2, Ming-An Li1, Junwei Chen1,2, Zhaolin Zeng1,2, Duo Zhu1, Chun Wu1, Zaibo Jiang1, Zhengran Li1, Mingsheng Huang1,2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To present the early results of pirarubicin-eluting microsphere transarterial chemoembolization (PE-TACE) for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).Entities:
Keywords: Drug-eluting chemoembolization; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Microspheres; Therapeutic chemoembolization; Treatment outcome
Year: 2019 PMID: 34805876 PMCID: PMC8562294 DOI: 10.1016/j.jimed.2019.09.005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Interv Med ISSN: 2590-0293
Fig. 1Pirarubicin-eluting HepaSphere microspheres. (a) Angiography showed hepatocellular carcinoma in the right liver. (b) Stasis was observed after embolization. (c) Repeat angiography performed 5 min later showed recanalization of the tumor-feeding arteries. (d) Repeat angiography performed 5 min after additional embolization showed stasis of the tumor arteries. (e) Repeat angiography confirmed stasis of the tumor arteries. (f–g) Pirarubicin-eluting HepaSphere beads. The diameter of the beads used in this study was 120–240 μm.
Fig. 2Enrolment of the study participants. HCC:Hepatocellular carcinoma, PE-TACE:Pirarubicin-eluting microsphere transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, TACE:Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization.
Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of the study participants.
| Baseline characteristic | Value (n = 55) |
|---|---|
| Age (years), mean ± standard deviation (range) | 52.8 ± 12.5 (32–86) |
| Sex (male/female) | 47/8 |
| Etiology (HBV/other) | 49/6 |
| Cirrhosis (yes/no) | 45/10 |
| BCLC stage (A/B/C) | 7/5/43 |
| Child-Pugh class (A/B) | 46/9 |
| ECOG PS score (0/1/2) | 17/31/7 |
| Largest tumor diameter (mm), median (range) | 60 (8–160) |
| Number of tumors (1/2/≥3) | 27/8/20 |
| Macroscopic vascular invasion (yes/no) | 29/26 |
| Ascites (yes/no) | 6/49 |
| Serum AFP level (<20 ng/mL/≥20 ng/mL) | 17/38 |
| HBV DNA level (<104 IU/mL/≥104 IU/mL) | 31/24 |
| Additional therapy (sorafenib/best supportive care) | 10/45 |
AFP:Alpha-fetoprotein, BCLC: Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer, ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, HBV:Hepatitis B virus.
Complications after treatment.
| Complication | No. | % |
|---|---|---|
| Pain | 39 | 70.9 |
| Grade A | 28 | 50.9 |
| Grade B | 11 | 20.0 |
| Fever | 18 | 32.7 |
| Grade A | 15 | 27.2 |
| Grade B | 3 | 5.5 |
| Abdominal distention | 4 | 7.3 |
| Grade A | 3 | 5.5 |
| Grade B | 1 | 1.8 |
| Nausea/vomiting | 3 | 5.5 |
| Grade A | 1 | 1.8 |
| Grade B | 2 | 3.6 |
| Ascites | 4 | 7.3 |
| Grade A | 2 | 3.6 |
| Grade B | 2 | 3.6 |
| Hydrothorax | ||
| Grade C | 1 | 1.8 |
Results of laboratory investigations.
| Variable | Baseline (n = 55) | 3 days post-TACE (n = 55) | 30 days post-TACE (n = 55) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ALT (U/L) | 60.6 ± 109.7 | 344.5 ± 1121.5 | <0.001 | 45.7 ± 72.7 | 0.027 |
| AST (U/L) | 55.6 ± 37.8 | 283.1 ± 368.5 | <0.001 | 46.3 ± 27.1 | 0.009 |
| Albumin (g/L) | 38.1 ± 4.6 | 36.2 ± 4.7 | <0.001 | 37.3 ± 5.1 | 0.157 |
| TBIL (μmol/L) | 27.6 ± 60.1 | 37.5 ± 58.7 | <0.001 | 29.1 ± 67.4 | 0.671 |
| GGT (g/L) | 136.2 ± 124.7 | 141.3 ± 128.0 | <0.001 | 107.1 ± 75.8 | 0.009 |
| CHE (U/L) | 5385.9 ± 2068.0 | 4782.6 ± 2124.3 | <0.001 | 4689.3 ± 2159.6 | 0.001 |
| PLT ( × 109/L) | 174.4 ± 103.3 | 153.0 ± 88.9 | <0.001 | 165.0 ± 105.2 | 0.391 |
| WBC ( × 109/L) | 6.5 ± 2.8 | 9.6 ± 6.0 | <0.001 | 5.4 ± 2.3 | <0.001 |
Data are presented as the mean ± standard deviation.
ALT: Alanine transaminase, AST: Aspartate transaminase, CHE: Cholinesterase, GGT: Gamma-glutamyltransferase, PLT: Platelet count, TACE: Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, TBIL: Total bilirubin, WBC: White blood cell count. The P values are for comparisons with the respective baseline value.
Tumor response according to the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) criteria.
| Overall tumor response (n = 55) | Target tumor response (n = 55) | Non-target tumor response (n = 32) | Newly developed tumor (n = 4) | BCLC stage A (n = 7) | BCLC stage B (n = 5) | BCLC stage C (n = 43) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CR | 14 (25.5%) | 15 (27.3%) | 2 (6.3%) | 6 (85.7%) | 0 | 8 (18.6%) | |
| PR | 25 (45.5%) | 34 (61.8%) | 11 (34.4%) | 1 (14.3%) | 5 (100%) | 19 (44.2%) | |
| SD | 9 (16.4%) | 5 (9.1%) | 13 (40.6%) | 0 | 0 | 9 (20.9%) | |
| PD | 7 (12.7%) | 1 (1.8%) | 6 (18.7%) | 4 (100%) | 0 | 0 | 7 (16.3%) |
| ORR | 39 (70.9%) | 49 (89.1%) | 13 (40.6%) | 7 (100%) | 5 (100%) | 27 (62.8%) | |
| DCR | 48 (87.3%) | 54 (98.2%) | 26 (81.3%) | 7 (100%) | 5 (100%) | 36 (83.7%) |
Data are presented as n (%). The tumor response for each patient was assessed as the best tumor response during the entire follow-up period. BCLC: Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer, CR:Complete response, DCR:Disease control rate, ORR:Overall response rate, PD:Progressive disease, PR:Partial response, SD:Stable disease. The ORR was defined as CR + PR; DCR was defined as CR + PR + SD.
Rates of overall tumor response according to the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) criteria at 1, 3, and 6 months after the first transcatheter arterial chemoembolization.
| Follow-up | CR | PR | SD | PD | ORR | DCR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 month (n = 55) | 9 (16.4%) | 30 (54.5%) | 9 (16.4%) | 7 (12.7%) | 39 (70.9%) | 48 (87.3%) |
| 3 months (n = 53 | 8 (15.1%) | 24 (45.3%) | 3 (5.7%) | 18 (34.0%) | 32 (60.4%) | 35 (66.0%) |
| 6 months (n = 40 | 12 (30.0%) | 12 (30.0%) | 1 (2.5%) | 15 (37.5%) | 24 (60.0%) | 25 (62.5%) |
Data are presented as n (%). CR:Complete response, DCR:Disease control rate, ORR:Overall response rate, PD:Progressive disease, PR:Partial response, SD:Stable disease. ORR was defined as CR + PR; DCR was defined as CR + PR + SD.
A total of 2 patients died before the 3-month follow-up.
A total of 15 patients died before the 6-month follow-up.
Fig. 3Imaging data from a patient showing a complete tumor response. (a) Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) image showing hepatocellular carcinoma in the right liver. (b–h) Follow-up CT images at different time points (1.5, 4.5, 6, 8, 11, 14, and 25 months, respectively) indicated a complete tumor response to therapy.
Fig. 4Kaplan-Meier curves illustrating overall survival and progression-free survival in the 55 patients treated by pirarubicin-eluting microsphere transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. (a) The median overall survival was 11.0 months (95% confidence interval, 7.1–14.9 months; range, 2.0–24.0 months). The 6-month and 1-year survival rates were 75.0% and 53.1%, respectively. (b) The median progression-free survival was 6.1 months (95% confidence interval, 3.4–8.8 months; range, 1.0–24.0 months).
Univariate and multivariate analysis of factors associated with overall survival.
| Variable | n | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95%CI | HR | 95%CI | ||||
| Age | 0.912 | ||||||
| <55 years | 33 | 0.961 | 0.466–1.980 | ||||
| ≥55 years | 22 | 1 | |||||
| Tumor number | 0.006 | 0.007 | |||||
| 1 | 27 | 2.663 | 1.269–5.588 | 2.867 | 1.330–6.181 | ||
| ≥2 | 28 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Tumor size | 0.035 | 0.094 | |||||
| <100 mm | 41 | 1.465 | 1.012–2.121 | 1.418 | 0.942–2.134 | ||
| ≥100 mm | 14 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| ECOG score | 0.005 | 0.099 | |||||
| 0–1 | 48 | 1.829 | 1.158–2.888 | 1.516 | 0.925–2.485 | ||
| 2 | 7 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| BCLC stage | 0.080 | ||||||
| A–B | 12 | 2.741 | 0.829–9.067 | ||||
| C | 43 | 1 | |||||
| Child-Pugh class | 0.196 | ||||||
| A | 46 | 1.787 | 0.721–4.429 | ||||
| B | 9 | 1 | |||||
| MVI | 0.062 | ||||||
| Absent | 26 | 2.003 | 0.940–4.267 | ||||
| Present | 29 | 1 | |||||
| AFP level | 0.352 | ||||||
| ≤400 ng/mL | 30 | 1.390 | 0.685–2.821 | ||||
| >400 ng/mL | 25 | 1 | |||||
| Additional therapy with sorafenib | 0.707–3.549 | 0.264 | |||||
| Yes | 10 | 1.584 | |||||
| No | 45 | 1 | |||||
95%CI: 95% confidence interval, AFP:Alpha fetoprotein, BCLC: Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer, ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, HR:Hazard ratio,MVI:Macroscopic vascular invasion.
Fig. 5Kaplan-Meier analysis of factors affecting overall survival (OS). (a) Log-rank analysis of OS stratified according to tumor number (single vs. multiple, P = 0.006). (b) Log-rank analysis of OS stratified according to tumor size (<5 cm vs. 5–10 cm vs. ≥10 cm, P = 0.035). (c) Log-rank analysis of OS stratified according to ECOG score (0 vs. 1 vs. 2, P = 0.005). (d) Log-rank analysis of OS stratified according to BCLC stage (A/B vs. C, P = 0.080). (e) Log-rank analysis of OS stratified according to Child-Pugh class (A vs. B, P = 0.196). (f) Log-rank analysis of OS stratified according to macroscopic vascular invasion (absent vs. present, P = 0.062).