Dataset Information

Adjuvant Sorafenib Following Radiofrequency Ablation for Early-Stage Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Microvascular Invasion at the Initial Hepatectomy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for patients with early-stage recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with microvascular invasion (MVI) at the initial hepatectomy is limited. Our study aimed to explore whether adjuvant sorafenib following RFA could improve the situation.

Methods

We retrospectively included 211 patients with early-stage (tumor number of ≤3 and tumor size of 2-5 cm) recurrent HCC with MVI at the initial hepatectomy who underwent adjuvant sorafenib following RFA or RFA alone in 13 centers from June 2013 to June 2020. In the combination group, sorafenib of 400 mg twice daily was administered within 7 days after RFA. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared. Subgroup analysis based on MVI grade was performed. MVI grade was based on the practice guidelines for the pathological diagnosis of HCC and included M1 (≤5 MVI sites, all located within adjacent peritumoral liver tissues 0-1 cm away from the tumor margin) and M2 (>5 MVI sites, or any MVI site located within adjacent peritumoral liver tissues > 1 cm away from the tumor margin).

Results

A total of 103 patients received the combination therapy and 108 patients received RFA alone. The combination therapy provided better survival than RFA alone (median RFS: 17.7 vs. 13.1 months, P < 0.001; median OS: 32.0 vs. 25.0 months, P = 0.002). Multivariable analysis revealed that treatment allocation was an independent prognostic factor. On subgroup analysis, the combination therapy provided better survival than RFA alone in patients with M1 along with either a tumor size of 3-5 cm, tumor number of two to three, or alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) > 400 μg/L, and in those with M2 along with either a tumor size of 2-3 cm, one recurrent tumor, or AFP ≤ 400 μg/L.

Conclusions

Adjuvant sorafenib following RFA was associated with better survival than RFA alone in patients with early-stage recurrent HCC with MVI at the initial hepatectomy. Moreover, MVI grade could guide the application of adjuvant sorafenib.

SUBMITTER: Wei MC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9260661 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceRepeat hepatectomy and percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (PRFA) are most commonly used to treat early-stage recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC) after initial resection, but previous studies comparing the effectiveness of the 2 treatments have reported conflicting results.ObjectiveTo compare the long-term survival outcomes after repeat hepatectomy with those after PRFA among patients with early-stage RHCC.Design, setting, and participantsThis open-label randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital and the National Center for Liver Cancer of China. A total of 240 patients with RHCC (with a solitary nodule diameter of ≤5 cm; 3 or fewer nodules, each ≤3 cm in diameter; and no macroscopic vascular invasion or distant metastasis) were randomized 1:1 to receive repeat hepatectomy or PRFA between June 3, 2010, and January 15, 2013. The median (range) follow-up time was 44.3 (4.3-90.6) months (last follow-up, January 15, 2018). Data analysis was conducted from June 15, 2018, to September 28, 2018.InterventionsRepeat hepatectomy (n = 120) or PRFA (n = 120).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included repeat recurrence-free survival (rRFS), patterns of repeat recurrence, and therapeutic safety.ResultsAmong the 240 randomized patients (216 men [90.0%]; median [range] age, 53.0 [24.0-59.0] years), 217 completed the trial. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year OS rates were 92.5% (95% CI, 87.9%-97.3%), 65.8% (95% CI, 57.8%-74.8%), and 43.6% (95% CI, 35.5%-53.5%), respectively, for the repeat hepatectomy group and 87.5% (95% CI, 81.8%-93.6%), 52.5% (95% CI, 44.2%-62.2%), and 38.5% (95% CI, 30.6%-48.4%), respectively, for the PRFA group (P = .17). The corresponding 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year rRFS rates were 85.0% (95% CI, 78.8%-91.6%), 52.4% (95% CI, 44.2%-62.2%), and 36.2% (95% CI, 28.5%-46.0%), respectively, for the repeat hepatectomy group and 74.2% (95% CI, 66.7%-82.4%), 41.7% (95% CI, 33.7%-51.5%), and 30.2% (95% CI, 22.9%-39.8%), respectively, for the PRFA group (P = .09). Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation was associated with a higher incidence of local repeat recurrence (37.8% vs 21.7%, P = .04) and early repeat recurrence than repeat hepatectomy (40.3% vs 23.3%, P = .04). In subgroup analyses, PRFA was associated with worse OS vs repeat hepatectomy among patients with an RHCC nodule diameter greater than 3 cm (hazard ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.05-2.84) or an α fetoprotein level greater than 200 ng/mL (hazard ratio, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.15-2.96). Surgery had a higher complication rate than did ablation (22.4% vs 7.3%, P = .001).Conclusions and relevanceNo statistically significant difference was observed in survival outcomes after repeat hepatectomy vs PRFA for patients with early-stage RHCC. Repeat hepatectomy may be associated with better local disease control and long-term survival in patients with an RHCC diameter greater than 3 cm or an AFP level greater than 200 ng/mL.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00822562.

Project description:BackgroundSince there is still controversy about the comparison of the efficacy and safety of RH and RFA in the treatment of recurrent liver cancer, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety, in order to provide evidence-based evidence for future research and clinical treatment.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from the establishment of the database to Feb 2021. We included studies that reported liver cancer patients underwent repeated hepatectomy (RH) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and we excluded duplicate publications, research without full text, incomplete information, or inability to conduct data extraction, animal experiments, reviews, and systematic reviews. The STATA 15.1 was used to analyze the data.ResultsThe pooled results show that the 3-year and 5-year overall survival (OS) rate of the repeated hepatectomy group was significantly higher than the radiofrequency ablation group (odds ratio (OR) = 1.95, 95% confidence interval (CI):1.47-2.60, P ≤ 0.001; OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.12-2.43, P = 0.012). Similarly, the pooled results show that the 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate of the repeated hepatectomy group was significantly higher than the radiofrequency ablation group (OR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.30-2.31, P ≤ 0.001; OR = 1.84, 95% CI: 1.38-2.49, P ≤ 0.001). However, there is no significant difference in the 1-year OS and DFS rate of repeated hepatectomy group and radiofrequency ablation group. Additionally, the pooled results show that the postoperative Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade II or higher complication rate of the repeated hepatectomy group was significantly higher than the radiofrequency ablation group (OR = 2.80, 95% CI: 1.37-5.75, P = 0.005).ConclusionBased on the pooled results of 8 existing retrospective studies, RH has a higher OS rate and DFS rate in the treatment of recurrent liver cancer, while the postoperative complication rate of RFA is lower. When survival is the primary goal, RH should be the first choice for recurrent liver cancer.

Project description:ImportanceThe long-term outcomes of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are not determined.ObjectiveTo report the long-term outcomes of TACE-RFA.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study analyzed long-term follow-up data from a phase 3 randomized clinical trial of adults with early HCC conducted from October 2006 to June 2009. Participants were randomly assigned to the TACE-RFA group or the RFA group in a 1:1 ratio and followed up approximately 6 years after the trial was closed. Data analysis was performed March 2020.ExposureIn the TACE-RFA group, TACE was performed first, and RFA was done 2 weeks later.Main outcomes and measuresOverall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS).ResultsOf 189 patients who were included (mean [SD] age, 54.3 [12.0] years; 146 [77.2%] men), 94 and 95 patients were assigned to the TACE-RFA group and RFA group, respectively, with their baseline characteristics well matched. Three patients in each group were lost to follow-up. The 5-year and 7-year OS rates for the TACE-RFA group vs the RFA group were 52.0% and 36.4% vs 43.2% and 19.4%, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.55; 95% CI, 0.39-0.78; P = .001). The 5-year and 7-year RFS rates for the TACE-RFA group vs the RFA group were 41.4% and 34.5% vs 27.4% and 18.1%, respectively (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49-0.89; P = .007). On subgroup analysis comparing patients who had tumors larger than 3 cm with those who had tumors 3 cm or smaller, the OS and RFS survival rates in the TACE-RFA group (HR, 3.20; 95% CI, 1.91-5.35, P < .001) were significantly better than those in the RFA group (HR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.30-3.17; P = .002).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, combined RFA and TACE was associated with better survival than RFA alone on long-term follow-up. Patients with tumors 3 cm or smaller did not benefit as well as patients with tumors larger than 3 cm from the combined treatment.

Project description:Objective: To investigate the perfusion features of local recurrence in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and pathological correlation, as well as to compare with those of initial HCC. Methods: From 2010 to 2018, 42 patients with recurrent HCC after RFA were enrolled in this study. The initial HCC patients included 32 males and 10 females with an average age of 58.2 ± 8.1 years. The CEUS images for initial HCC lesions and local recurrence after RFA were compared. The perfusion features were analyzed, including enhancement time, process, boundary, morphology, washout time, washout degree, feeding vessels, and internal necrosis. H&E staining and CD133/EpCAM staining were performed with biopsy samples for the stemness study. Results: According to CEUS, 59.5% of initial HCC lesions had centripetal enhancement, and 61.9% of recurrent HCC lesions had homogeneous enhancement in the arterial phase (p < 0.001). A total of 73.8% of initial HCC lesions had well-defined margins at the peak, and 81.0% of recurrent HCC lesions had poorly defined margins (p < 0.001). A total of 78.6% of initial HCC lesions had regular morphology at the peak, and 83.3% of recurrent HCC lesions were irregular (p < 0.001). Feeding vessels were more frequently found in initial HCC lesion (71.4%) than in recurrent HCCs (38.1%, p = 0.002). In the late phase, 60% of initial HCCs had marked washout while 83.3% of recurrent HCC lesion had marked washout (p = 0.019). A total of 31.3% of the initial HCC lesions had internal necrosis areas while only 7.1% of recurrent HCC lesions had internal necrosis areas (p = 0.035). In tumors 3-5 cm in size, the washout time of recurrent HCCs was shorter than that of initial HCCs (50.3 ± 13.5 s vs. 75.6 ± 45.8 s, p = 0.013). Pathological staining showed that the tumor stem cell markers (CD133 and EpCAM) were both highly expressed in recurrent samples compared with initial tumor samples (CD133+: 19 vs. 5%, p = 0.002; EpCAM+:15 vs. 6%, p = 0.005). Conclusions: Recurrent HCC after RFA had more homogeneous enhancement with a poorly defined border, marked washout, and fewer less feeding vessels and inner necrosis areas compared to initial HCC. The stemness study also found upregulated stemness in recurrent HCC. These specific features might be related to the aggressive biological behavior of recurrent HCC.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared the effects of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the results have remained inconsistent. Hence, a meta-analysis and a systematic review of these treatment modalities are necessary to evaluate their efficacy and safety for HCC treatment. METHODS:From the inception of this meta-analysis and review until August 31, 2019, we searched Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, and China Biomedical Literature Database for RCTs involving LH and RFA treatments of patients with HCC. The studies were screened and the data from these articles were extracted independently by two authors. Summary odd ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each outcome with a fixed- or random-effect model. The outcomes for effectiveness evaluations included duration of surgery, estimated bleeding volume, incidence of blood transfusion during surgery, duration of hospital stay, and the outcome for safety included the incidence of cancer recurrence. RESULTS:Seven RCTs with a total of 615 patients were identified, 312 and 303 of which underwent RFA and LH treatments, respectively. The duration of surgery (MD = -99.04; 95% CI: -131.26--66.82), estimated bleeding volume (MD = -241.97; 95% CI: -386.93--97.02), incidence of blood transfusion during surgery (OR = 0.08; 95% CI: 0.02-0.37), and duration of hospital stay (MD = -3.4; 95% CI: -5.22--1.57) in RFA treatment were significantly lower than those of LH treatment. However, the incidence of cancer recurrence was significantly higher for RFA treatment compared with LH treatment (OR = 2.68; 95% CI: 1.72-4.18). CONCLUSIONS:LH treatment is preferred over RFA treatment with a better radical effect, but RFA treatment is more beneficial with smaller trauma, development of less complications, and shorter operating time when compared with HCC treatment.