Chemoocclusion vs chemoperfusion for treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A randomised trial

Comparison of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and microsphere embolization for treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis

“…Lastly, response rate to these two treatment did not differ significantly; however, there was a tendency toward a higher response rate in the microsphere treatment than that of TACE, that is, partial response rate was 26% versus 9%, stable disease 41% versus 55%, progressive disease 33% versus 36% of these two treatment, respectively (Lewandowski et al 2009;Kirchhoff et al 2006). Nevertheless, a previous study focused on the response of treatment options to target lesions as opposed to the natural history of UNOS staging (i.e., new lesions or change in untreated lesion size), which used strict size criteria to assess downstaging.…”

“…3) (Salem et al 2011;Carr et al 2010;Kooby et al 2009;Lewandowski et al 2009;Lee et al 2008;Kirchhoff et al 2006;Cao et al 2005a, b;Liu et al 2005;Du et al 2002). Among these patients, 521 were treated with microsphere embolization and 351 of these 521 patients (67.4%) survived over 1 year, whereas only 575 of 1132 HCC patients (50.7%) survived after 1-year treatment with chemoembolization, conferring a pooled RR for 1-year survival rate of 1.13 (95% CI 1.00-1.27; P = 0.05).…”

“…Thus, if these two subgroups were combined, the statistically significant difference was only marginal (RR 1.04 vs. 1.41, interaction P = 0.075). Data on ten studies were available for response rate analyses in 396 and 1,033 patients treated with microsphere embolization or chemoembolization, respectively (Carr et al 2010;Kooby et al 2009;Lewandowski et al 2009;Lee et al 2008;Hou et al 2006;Kirchhoff et al 2006;Ahmad et al 2005;Cao et al 2005a, b;Du et al 2002;Hao et al 2000). Overall, 231 (58.3%) and 570 (55.2%) patients who underwent microsphere embolization or chemoembolization showed complete or partial responses.…”

“…A total of thirteen studies (Salem et al 2011;Carr et al 2010;Kooby et al 2009;Lewandowski et al 2009;Lee et al 2008;Hou et al 2006;Kirchhoff et al 2006;Ahmad et al 2005;Cao et al 2005a, b;Liu et al 2005;Du et al 2002;Hao et al 2000) were included in our analysis criteria, which included 597 and 1,233 HCC patients for treatment with microsphere embolization and chemoembolization, respectively (Table 1). Of these published studies, ten had comparison data on response rate and 1-year survival rate, three had overall survival (OS), and two had time to progression.…”

Transarterial Chemoembolization - Status Quo in Germany

“…Whether comparable results can be achieved with the new DSM-TACE method with temporary vascular occlusion via starch microspheres has not yet been systematically examined. However, growth-retarding effects in HCC could be shown for DSM-TACE [20]. The results of this survey reflect the current situation: There is no generally preferred TACE protocol with respect to the materials used in Germany even if DEB-TACE and conventional cTACE with a combination of lipiodol and chemotherapeutic agent are the most frequently used and favored protocols.…”