Cargando…

Transarterial chemoembolization versus hepatic resection in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: A number of cohort studies have compared the outcomes of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and hepatic resection (HR) in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the effect of TACE versus HR remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tian, Xin, Dai, Ying, Wang, Da-qing, Zhang, Li, Sui, Cheng-guang, Meng, Fan-dong, Jiang, Shen-yi, Liu, Yun-peng, Jiang, You-hong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4539084/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26309396
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S86629
_version_ 1782386067331088384
author Tian, Xin
Dai, Ying
Wang, Da-qing
Zhang, Li
Sui, Cheng-guang
Meng, Fan-dong
Jiang, Shen-yi
Liu, Yun-peng
Jiang, You-hong
author_facet Tian, Xin
Dai, Ying
Wang, Da-qing
Zhang, Li
Sui, Cheng-guang
Meng, Fan-dong
Jiang, Shen-yi
Liu, Yun-peng
Jiang, You-hong
author_sort Tian, Xin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A number of cohort studies have compared the outcomes of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and hepatic resection (HR) in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the effect of TACE versus HR remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of TACE and HR in HCC treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane library were searched from their inception until February 27, 2015 for relevant studies. The literature search was updated on May 25, 2015. Eligible studies were cohort studies comparing the survival outcomes between HCC patients undergoing TACE and HR. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were the recurrence rate and prognostic factors for OS. The risk ratio (RR) was used for the meta-analysis and was expressed with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: This meta-analysis included eleven cohort studies with 6,297 patients, all treated with TACE or HR. Pooled estimates showed that, compared with TACE, HR significantly improved the 3-year OS (RR =0.77; 95% CI, 0.63–0.93; P=0.009). TACE and HR had similar effects on OS after 1 year (RR =0.94; 95% CI, 0.86–1.01; P=0.103), 2 years (RR =0.50; 95% CI, 0.21–1.19; P=0.114), 4 years (RR =0.61; 95% CI, 0.58–1.10; P=0.174), and 5 years (RR =0.77; 95% CI, 0.59–1.01; P=0.06). There was no significant difference between the 3-year (RR =1.31; 95% CI, 0.65–2.64; P=0.457) and 5-year recurrence rates (RR =1.14; 95% CI, 0.69–1.89; P=0.597) in the TACE and HR groups. Age (>65 vs ≤65 years; hazard ratio =0.99; 95% CI, 0.98–1.00; P=0.000), sex (male vs female; hazard ratio =0.79; 95% CI, 0.65–0.96; P=0.02), treatment method (TACE vs HR; hazard ratio =1.90; 95% CI, 1.46–2.46; P=0.000), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score (≥1 vs 0; hazard ratio =1.69; 95% CI, 1.22–2.33; P=0.002) were independent predictors for OS. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that the TACE and HR likely have similar effects in the treatment of HCC patients in terms of OS and recurrence rate. However, this conclusion should be interpreted cautiously due to the presence of further subgroup analyses with respect to outcomes in patients with different liver statuses (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage A or stage B).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4539084
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45390842015-08-25 Transarterial chemoembolization versus hepatic resection in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: a meta-analysis Tian, Xin Dai, Ying Wang, Da-qing Zhang, Li Sui, Cheng-guang Meng, Fan-dong Jiang, Shen-yi Liu, Yun-peng Jiang, You-hong Drug Des Devel Ther Original Research BACKGROUND: A number of cohort studies have compared the outcomes of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and hepatic resection (HR) in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the effect of TACE versus HR remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of TACE and HR in HCC treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane library were searched from their inception until February 27, 2015 for relevant studies. The literature search was updated on May 25, 2015. Eligible studies were cohort studies comparing the survival outcomes between HCC patients undergoing TACE and HR. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were the recurrence rate and prognostic factors for OS. The risk ratio (RR) was used for the meta-analysis and was expressed with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: This meta-analysis included eleven cohort studies with 6,297 patients, all treated with TACE or HR. Pooled estimates showed that, compared with TACE, HR significantly improved the 3-year OS (RR =0.77; 95% CI, 0.63–0.93; P=0.009). TACE and HR had similar effects on OS after 1 year (RR =0.94; 95% CI, 0.86–1.01; P=0.103), 2 years (RR =0.50; 95% CI, 0.21–1.19; P=0.114), 4 years (RR =0.61; 95% CI, 0.58–1.10; P=0.174), and 5 years (RR =0.77; 95% CI, 0.59–1.01; P=0.06). There was no significant difference between the 3-year (RR =1.31; 95% CI, 0.65–2.64; P=0.457) and 5-year recurrence rates (RR =1.14; 95% CI, 0.69–1.89; P=0.597) in the TACE and HR groups. Age (>65 vs ≤65 years; hazard ratio =0.99; 95% CI, 0.98–1.00; P=0.000), sex (male vs female; hazard ratio =0.79; 95% CI, 0.65–0.96; P=0.02), treatment method (TACE vs HR; hazard ratio =1.90; 95% CI, 1.46–2.46; P=0.000), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score (≥1 vs 0; hazard ratio =1.69; 95% CI, 1.22–2.33; P=0.002) were independent predictors for OS. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that the TACE and HR likely have similar effects in the treatment of HCC patients in terms of OS and recurrence rate. However, this conclusion should be interpreted cautiously due to the presence of further subgroup analyses with respect to outcomes in patients with different liver statuses (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage A or stage B). Dove Medical Press 2015-08-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4539084/ /pubmed/26309396 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S86629 Text en © 2015 Tian et al. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Tian, Xin
Dai, Ying
Wang, Da-qing
Zhang, Li
Sui, Cheng-guang
Meng, Fan-dong
Jiang, Shen-yi
Liu, Yun-peng
Jiang, You-hong
Transarterial chemoembolization versus hepatic resection in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: a meta-analysis
title Transarterial chemoembolization versus hepatic resection in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: a meta-analysis
title_full Transarterial chemoembolization versus hepatic resection in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: a meta-analysis
title_fullStr Transarterial chemoembolization versus hepatic resection in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: a meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Transarterial chemoembolization versus hepatic resection in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: a meta-analysis
title_short Transarterial chemoembolization versus hepatic resection in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: a meta-analysis
title_sort transarterial chemoembolization versus hepatic resection in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: a meta-analysis
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4539084/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26309396
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S86629
work_keys_str_mv AT tianxin transarterialchemoembolizationversushepaticresectioninhepatocellularcarcinomatreatmentametaanalysis
AT daiying transarterialchemoembolizationversushepaticresectioninhepatocellularcarcinomatreatmentametaanalysis
AT wangdaqing transarterialchemoembolizationversushepaticresectioninhepatocellularcarcinomatreatmentametaanalysis
AT zhangli transarterialchemoembolizationversushepaticresectioninhepatocellularcarcinomatreatmentametaanalysis
AT suichengguang transarterialchemoembolizationversushepaticresectioninhepatocellularcarcinomatreatmentametaanalysis
AT mengfandong transarterialchemoembolizationversushepaticresectioninhepatocellularcarcinomatreatmentametaanalysis
AT jiangshenyi transarterialchemoembolizationversushepaticresectioninhepatocellularcarcinomatreatmentametaanalysis
AT liuyunpeng transarterialchemoembolizationversushepaticresectioninhepatocellularcarcinomatreatmentametaanalysis
AT jiangyouhong transarterialchemoembolizationversushepaticresectioninhepatocellularcarcinomatreatmentametaanalysis