Background:Transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation (TACE) is the treatment of choice for intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Doxorubicin-loaded drug-eluting beads (DEB)-TACE is expected to improve the performance of conventional TACE (cTACE). The aim of this study was to compare DEB-TACE with cTACE in terms of time-to-tumour progression (TTP), adverse events (AEs), and 2-year survival.Methods:Patients were randomised one-to-one to undergo cTACE or DEB-TACE and followed-up for at least 2 years or until death. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation was repeated ‘on-demand'.Results:We enrolled 177 patients: 89 underwent DEB-TACE and 88 cTACE. The median number of procedures was 2 in each arm, and the in-hospital stay was 3 and 4 days, respectively (P=0.323). No differences were found in local and overall tumour response. The median TTP was 9 months in both arms. The AE incidence and severity did not differ between the arms, except for post-procedural pain, more frequent and severe after cTACE (P<0.001). The 1- and 2-year survival rates were 86.2% and 56.8% after DEB-TACE and 83.5% and 55.4% after cTACE (P=0.949). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG), serum albumin, and tumour number independently predicted survival (P<0.05).Conclusions:The DEB-TACE and the cTACE are equally effective and safe, with the only advantage of DEB-TACE being less post-procedural abdominal pain.

In prospective, non-randomized study of patients with cirrhosis, we found under-dilation of PTFE-SGs during TIPS placement to be feasible, associated with lower rates of PSE, and effective.

Background: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma has a poor prognosis, resulting in a <10% survival rate at 5 years. Modulated electro-hyperthermia (mEHT) has been increasingly used for pancreatic cancer palliative care and therapy. Objective: To monitor the efficacy and safety of mEHT for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Methods: We collected data retrospectively on 106 patients affected by stage III-IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma. They were divided into 2 groups: patients who did not receive mEHT (no-mEHT) and patients who were treated with mEHT. We performed mEHT applying a power of 60 to 150 W for 40 to 90 minutes. The mEHT treatment was associated with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy for 33 (84.6%) patients, whereas 6 (15.4%) patients received mEHT alone. The patients of the no-mEHT group received chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy in 55.2% of cases. Results: Median age of the sample was 65.3 years (range = 31-80 years). After 3 months of therapy, the mEHT group had partial response in 22/34 patients (64.7%), stable disease in 10/34 patients (29.4%), and progressive disease in 2/34 patients (8.3%). The no-mEHT group had partial response in 3/36 patients (8.3%), stable disease in 10/36 patients (27.8%), and progressive disease in 23/36 patients (34.3%). The median overall survival of the mEHT group was 18.0 months (range = 1.5-68.0 months) and 10.9 months (range = 0.4-55.4 months) for the non-mEHT group. Conclusions: mEHT may improve tumor response and survival of pancreatic cancer patients.

Transplantation is the treatment of choice for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) meeting the Milan criteria. HCC and chronic liver diseases have distinct natural histories for which an equitable transplant policy must account. We enrolled and prospectively followed at a single center 206 consecutive HCC patients that presented within the Milan criteria. Patients were treated per the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) algorithm; 95% received resection, ablation, or transarterial chemoembolization. The median follow-up was 16 months. Progression occurred in 84 patients, and 8 patients died. Risk factors for the time to disease progression (death or progression beyond T2) were analyzed in 170 patients with a complete data set. Risk factors with the strongest relationship to progression included tumor diameter and tumor persistence/recurrence after local therapy (hazard ratios of 1.51 and 2.75, respectively, when transplanted patients were censored at the time of transplantation and hazard ratios of 1.53 and 3.66, respectively, when transplantation was counted as an event; P 0.0001). To evaluate the current Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) exception, we compared the expected progression rate (PR) with our observed PR in 133 stage T2 patients. The current policy resulted in a large overestimation of the PR for T2 HCC and an unsatisfactory performance [Harrell's concordance index (C index) ¼ 0.60, transplant censored; C index ¼ 0.55, transplant as progression]. Risk factors for progression that were identified by univariate analysis were considered for multivariate analysis. With these risk factors and the patients' natural MELD scores, an adjusted model applicable to organ allocation was generated, and this decreased the discrepancy between the expected and observed PRs (C index ¼ 0.66, transplant censored; C index ¼ 0.69, transplant as progression). In conclusion, the current MELD exception largely overestimates progression in T2 patients treated according to the BCLC guidelines. The tumor response to resective or ablative treatment can predict tumor progression beyond the Milan criteria, and it should be taken into account in models designed to prioritize organ allocation. Liver Transpl 16:503-512,