Abstract
Toconduct a large single-institution comparison of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) outcomes in similar groups of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). From 2006 to 2014, 209 patients with 1 to 2 tumors underwent TACE (n=84) to 114 tumors or image guided SBRT (n=125) to 173 tumors. Propensity score analysis with inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to compare outcomes between treatments while adjusting for imbalances in treatment assignment. Local control (LC), toxicity, and overall survival (OS) were retrospectively analyzed. The TACE and SBRT groups were similar with respect to the number of tumors treated per patient, underlying liver disease, and baseline liver function. Patients treated with SBRT were older (65 vs 61years, P=.01), had smaller tumors (2.3 vs 2.9cm, P<.001), and less frequently underwent liver transplantation (8% vs 18%, P=.01). The 1- and 2-year LC favored SBRT: 97% and 91%, respectively, for SBRT and 47% and 23% for TACE (hazard ratio 66.5, P<.001). For patients treated with TACE, higher alpha-fetoprotein (hazard ratio 1.11 per doubling, P=.008) and segmental portal vein thrombosis (hazard ratio 9.9, P<.001) were associated with worse LC. Predictors associated with LC after SBRT were not identified. Grade 3+toxicity occurred after 13% and 8% of TACE and SBRT treatments, respectively (P=.05). There was no difference in OS between patients treated with TACE or SBRT. Stereotactic body radiation therapy is a safe alternative to TACE for 1 to 2 tumors and provides better LC, with no observed difference in OS. Prospective comparative trials of TACE and SBRT are warranted.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.