Comparison of the antitumor efficacy of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization with a miriplatin‐iodized oil suspension and a cisplatin‐iodized oil suspension for hepatocellular carcinoma

Abstract

To retrospectively compare the short-term antitumor efficacy and safety of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) with a cisplatin-iodized oil suspension (C-IS) and a miriplatin-iodized oil suspension (M-IS) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Of patients who underwent TACE for unresectable HCC between January 2010 and August 2011, 25 and 21 patients received C-IS and M-IS, respectively. The short-term therapeutic efficacy of both groups was evaluated by the treatment effect seen on dynamic enhanced computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging of tumor nodules 3 months after treatment. Adverse events were evaluated to compare C-IS and M-IS. After TACE using C-IS and M-IS, 100% necrosis or tumor size reduction was achieved in 30 and 18 tumor nodules, respectively (81% vs 53%; P = 0.006). Objective responses were achieved in 30 nodules exposed to TACE using C-IS and 17 exposed to TACE using M-IS (81% vs 50%; P = 0.011). Disease control was achieved in 36 nodules exposed to C-IS and 27 exposed to M-IS (97% vs 79%; P = 0.017). The percentage of patients attaining a complete response, an objective response and disease control was significantly greater in the C-IS group than in the M-IS group. No significant differences were found in the aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin and creatinine levels between the two groups either before treatment or 1 month after treatment. The short-term antitumor effects of TACE with C-IS may be superior to those with M-IS in terms of the complete response, objective response and disease control rates.