Skip to main content

Should we routinely use DEBTACE for unresectable HCC? cTACE versus DEBTACE: a single-center survival analysis

Updates in Surgery volume 69, pages 67–73 (2017)Cite this article

Abstract

Conventional trans-arterial chemoembolization (cTACE) for intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) achieves a partial response in up to 72% of patients and improves median survival. Drug-eluting-beads-TACE (DEBTACE) improves treatment efficacy and tolerance as compared to cTACE. Our aim was to retrospectively evaluate our experience in the treatment of intermediate/advanced HCC with cTACE versus DEBTACE. Overall survival (OS) was the first endpoint. We retrospectively considered our department register data between 2006 and 2012. A total of 82 non-surgical patients, who underwent cTACE or DEBTACE, with a minimum of 12 months follow-up, met the inclusion criteria. Patients received a standard chemotherapy dose (50 mg). Radiological response was evaluated by CT after 30 days and re-treatment was considered. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS software. 54 patients received cTACE and 28 DEBTACE. In the DEBTACE group the median survival times was 22.7 months (CI 11.6–33.8), while in the cTACE group it was 21.8 months (CI 15.7–27.9). The survival analysis at log-rank (p = 0.708) and Wilcoxon (p = 0.661) tests demonstrated no differences between DEBTACE and cTACE. The probability of death in function of time was significantly associated only to the Child–Pugh score. A Child A score was shown to be protective instead of Child B (OR 0.583; IC 95% = 0.344–0.987). DEBTACE for treating HCC is comparable to cTACE in terms of effectiveness, but seems to be better tolerated. Both treatments can be performed in case of tumor recurrence without substantial increase in procedural complications and risk of liver failure. We do confirm that there are no differences between the two techniques in terms of survival and that it is mainly affected by the reserved liver function proper of each patient.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Forner A, Llovet JM, Bruix J (2012) Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet 379(9822):1245–1255

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Llovet JM, Bru C, Bruix J (1999) Prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: the BCLC staging classification. Semin Liver Dis 19:329–338

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bruix J, Llovet JM (2002) Prognostic prediction and treatment strategy in hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 35:519–524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bruix J, Sherman M (2011) Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 53:1020–1022

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. de Lope CR et al (2012) Management of HCC. J Hepatol 56(Suppl 1):S75–S87

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mazzaferro V et al (1996) Liver transplantation for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinomas in patients with cirrhosis. N Engl J Med 334:693–700

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lammer J et al (2010) Prospective randomized study of doxorubicin-eluting-bead embolization in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: results of the PRECISION V study. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 33(1):41–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. European Association For The Study Of The Liver (2012) EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 56(4):908–943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Angelico M (2016) TACE vs DEB-TACE: Who wins? Digestive and Liver Disease

  10. Facciorusso A et al (2015) Transarterial chemoembolization: evidences from the literature and applications in hepatocellular carcinoma patients. World J Hepatol 7(16):2009

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Malagari K et al (2008) Transarterial chemoembolization of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma with drug eluting beads: results of an open-label study of 62 patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 31:269–280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Poon RT et al (2007) A phase I/II trial of chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma using a novel intra-arterial drug-eluting bead. Clin Gastroenterol Hepato 5:1100–1108

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Varela M et al (2007) Chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma with drug eluting beads: efficacy and doxorubicin pharmacokinetics. J Hepatol 46:474–481

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Han KH et al (2011) Asian consensus workshop report: expert consensus guideline for the management of intermediate and advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in Asia. Oncology 81(Suppl 1):158–164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Liapi E, Geschwind J-FH (2011) Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for liver cancer: is it time to distinguish conventional from drug-eluting chemoembolization? Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 34:37–49

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Therasse P et al (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205–216

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Eisenhauer EA et al (2009) New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45:228–247

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. El-Serag HB, Rudolph KL (2007) Hepatocellular carcinoma: epidemiology and molecular carcinogenesis. Gastroenterology 132:2557–2576

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ferlay J et al (2010) Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer 127:2893–2917

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. El-Serag HB (2011) Hepatocellular carcinoma. N Eng J Med 365:1118–1127

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sherman M (2010) Hepatocellular carcinoma: epidemiology, surveillance, and diagnosis. Seminar Liver Dis 30:3–16

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fattovich G et al (2004) Hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: incidence and risk factors. Gastroenterology 53:S35–S50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Bruno S, Stroffolini T, Colombo M (2007) Sustained virological response to interferon-alpha is associated with improved outcome in HCV-related cirrhosis: a retrospective study. Hepatology 45:579–587

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Altekruse SF, McGlynn KA, Reichman ME (2009) Hepatocellular carcinoma incidence, mortality, and survival trends in the United States form 1975 to 2005. J Clin Oncol 27:1485–1491

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Llovet JM, Di Bisceglie AM, Bruix J (2008) Design and endpoints of clinical trials in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:698–711

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Llovet JM, Bruix J (2003) Systematic review of randomized trials for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: chemoembolization improves survival. Hepatology 37:429–442

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lewis AL, Gonzales MV, Lloyd AW (2006) DC Bead: in vitro characterisation of a drug-delivery device for transarterial chemoembolisation. J Vasc Interv Radiol 17:335–342

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lewis AL, Gonzalez MV, Leppard SW (2007) Doxorubicin eluting beads. 1. Effects of drug loading on bead characteristics and drug distribution. J Mater Sci Mater Med 18:1691–1699

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Llovet JM et al (2002) Arterial embolisation or chemoembolisation versus symptomatic treatment in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 359:1734–1739

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lo CM et al (2002) Randomized controlled trial of transarterial lipiodol chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 35:1164–1171

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hong K, Khwaja A, Liapi E (2006) New intra-arterial drug delivery system for the treatment of liver cancer: preclinical assessment in a rabbit model of liver cancer. Clin Cancer Res 12:2563–2567

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Golfieri R, Giampalma E, Renzulli M (2014) Randomised controlled trial of doxorubicin-eluting beads vs conventional chemoembolisation for hepatocellular carcinoma. Br J Cancer 111:255–264

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Facciorusso A, Mariani L, Sposito C (2016) Drug-eluting beads versus conventional chemoembolization for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 31:645–653

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Dhanasekaran R, Kooby DA, Staley CA, Kauh JS, Khanna V, Kim HS (2010) Comparison of conventional transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and chemoembolization with doxorubicin drug eluting beads (DEB) for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). J Surg Oncol 101:476–480

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Song MJ, Chun HJ, Kim HY, Yoo SH, Park CH, Bae SH, Choi JY (2012) Comparative study between doxorubicin-eluting beads and conventional transarterial chemoembolization for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 57:1244–1250

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Malagari K et al (2010) Prospective randomized comparison of chemoembolization with doxorubicin-eluting beads and bland embolization with BeadBlock for hepatocellular carcinoma. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 33:541–551

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sacco R et al (2011) Conventional versus doxorubicin-eluting Bead transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. J Vasc Interv Radiol 22:1545–1552

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Scartozzi M, Baroni GS, Faloppi L, Paolo MD, Pierantoni C, Candelari R (2010) Trans-arterial chemo-embolization (TACE), with either lipiodol (traditional TACE) or drug-eluting microspheres (precision TACE, pTACE) in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: efficacy and safety results from a large mono-institutional analysis. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 29:1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Gao S, Yang Z, Zheng Z, Yao J, Deng M, Xie H, Zheng S, Zhou L (2013) Doxorubicin-eluting bead versus conventional TACE for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Hepatogastroenterology 60:813–820

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Xie ZB, Wang XB, Peng YC (2015) Systematic review comparing the safety and efficacy of conventional and drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization for inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatol Res 45:190–200

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Song MJ et al (2011) Drug-eluting bead loaded with doxorubicin versus conventional Lipiodol-based transarterial chemoembolization in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: a case-control study of Asian patients. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 23:521–527

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Cuchetti A, Trevisani F, Cappelli A, Mosconi C, Renzulli M, Pinna AD, Golfieri R (2016) Cost-effectiveness of doxorubicin-eluting beads versus conventional trans-arterial chemo-embolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. Dig Liver Dis. 48(7):798–805

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. IV Department Of Surgery, Regional Center for HPB Surgery, Ca’ Foncello Regional Hospital, 31100, Treviso, Italy

    M. Massani, T. Stecca, C. Ruffolo & N. Bassi

  2. IV Divisione Chirurgica, Ospedale Regionale, Piazza Ospedale 1, 31100, Treviso, Italy

    M. Massani

Authors
  1. M. Massani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. Stecca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C. Ruffolo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. N. Bassi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Massani.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Research involving human and/or animals

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study and additional informed consent was obtained from all individual participants for whom identifying information is included in this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Massani, M., Stecca, T., Ruffolo, C. et al. Should we routinely use DEBTACE for unresectable HCC? cTACE versus DEBTACE: a single-center survival analysis. Updates Surg 69, 67–73 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-017-0414-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-017-0414-3

Keywords

  • Hepatocellular carcinoma
  • Overall survival
  • Transarterial chemoembolization
  • Drug eluting beads chemoembolization