Drug-eluting beads versus conventional transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis

Drug-eluting beads transarterial chemoembolization vs conventional transarterial chemoembolization in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in adult patients: a systematic review and update meta-analysis of observational studies

Study design

Systematic review and update meta-analysis.

Purpose

The present systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of the two approaches for HCC in adult patients (DEB-TACE vs cTACE).

Overview of literature

The TACE procedure is indicated for the treatment of HCC with intermediate (BCLC B) and early (BCLC A). Conflicting data obtained from earlier meta-analyses comparing DEB-TACE with cTACE prompted the updated meta-analysis.

Methods

The study included adult patients over the age of 18 with HCC. MEDLINE conducted a literature search using Pubmed and Google Scholar up to May 2024. The following parameters were evaluated: the effectiveness of the tumor response to treatment according to the mRECIST criteria (CR, PR, SD, PD), overall survival, progression-free survival, and complication rate. 32 retro- and prospective studies were analyzed.

Results

The study included 4,367 patients. The radiological response of the tumor in all four CR, PR, SD, and PD parameters in the DEB-TACE group showed the best response. The overall survival rate during the DEB-TACE procedure was higher by 3.54 months (p <0.00001), and progression-free survival (PFS) by 3.07 months (p <0.0001), respectively. The incidence of complications was comparable in both groups.

Conclusions

The results of the meta-analysis revealed clinically significant advantages of DEB-TACE in comparison with cTACE. Being comparable in terms of the frequency of complications, DEB-TACE demonstrated the best result in the radiological response of the tumor to the therapy, in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival.

Gastrointestinal side effects in hepatocellular carcinoma patients receiving transarterial chemoembolization: a meta-analysis of 81 studies and 9495 patients

Background

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is a widely used treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), combining targeted chemotherapy and embolization. While effective, TACE can be associated with significant gastrointestinal (GI) side effects, impacting a patient's quality of life.

Objectives

Quantify the prevalence of key GI complications (diarrhea, nausea, GI toxicity, abdominal pain) following TACE.

Design

Systematic review was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, focusing on studies that reported side effects of TACE. Studies not involving cTACE or drug-eluting bead TACE (DEB-TACE), non-HCC studies, meta-analyses or systematic reviews, and inaccessible publications were excluded.

Data sources and methods

A PubMed search for clinical and randomized trials was conducted. Extracted data included study identifiers, demographics, TACE details, and GI side effect prevalences. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool assessed study quality and bias.

Results

The analysis included data from 81 studies with 121 individual study arms and 9495 patients. Diarrhea was reported in 38 studies, with a mean prevalence of 23.46% (2.5; 95% confidence interval (CI): 18.39-28.544) and a weighted prevalence of 23.5%. Nausea was most frequently reported, mentioned in 67 studies, with a mean prevalence of 34.66% (2.4; 95% CI: 29.89-39.44) and a weighted prevalence of 32.5%. Abdominal pain was reported in 59 studies, with the highest mean prevalence of 48.07% (2.9; 95% CI: 42.20-53.93) and a weighted prevalence of 46.1%. GI toxicity was reported in 32 studies, with a mean prevalence of 8.85% (1.4; 95% CI: 5.99-11.70) and a weighted prevalence of 9.9%. DEB-TACE generally led to slightly higher rates of nausea, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and GI toxicity compared to conventional TACE. The type of chemotherapy agent influenced prevalence of GI-side effects, with high prevalences observed for agents such as zinostatin and cisplatin.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis synthesizes current evidence on managing GI side effects in TACE. Standardizing reporting and developing effective management strategies are crucial to improving patient outcomes.

Safety, efficacy, and survival of different transarterial chemoembolization techniques in the management of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparative single-center analysis

PURPOSE

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) has become the standard of care for the treatment of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, current clinical practice guidelines lack consensus on the best selection of a specific TACE technique. This study aims to compare safety, tumor response, and progression-free survival (PFS) of conventional TACE (cTACE), drug-eluting bead TACE (DEB-TACE), and degradable starch microsphere TACE (DSM-TACE).

METHODS

This retrospective study included n = 192 patients with HCC who underwent first TACE with unbiased follow-up at 4-6 weeks at our center between 2008 and 2021. Eligibility for TACE was BCLC intermediate stage B, bridging/down-staging (B/D) to liver transplantation (LT), or any other stage when patients were not suitable for resection, LT, local ablation, or systemic therapy. Patients were grouped into three cohorts (n = 45 cTACE, n = 84 DEB-TACE, n = 63 DSM-TACE), and further categorized by TACE indication (B/D or palliative). Liver function and adverse events, response assessed by the modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (mRECIST) 4-6 weeks post-TACE and PFS were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in age, gender distribution, BCLC stage, or etiology of liver disease among the three TACE groups, even in the B/D or palliative subgroups. DEB-TACE induced slight increases in bilirubin in the palliative subgroup and in lactate dehydrogenase in the entire cohort 4-6 weeks post-TACE, and more adverse events in the palliative subgroup. DEB-TACE and DSM-TACE showed significantly higher disease control rates (complete and partial response, stable disease) compared to cTACE, especially in the B/D setting (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in PFS between the groups [median PFS (months): cTACE, 10.0 vs. DEB, 7.0 vs. DSM, 10.0; p = 0.436].

CONCLUSION

Our study provides valuable perspectives in the decision-making for a specific TACE technique: DEB-TACE and DSM-TACE showed improved tumor response. DEB-TACE showed a prolonged impact on liver function and more side effects, so patients with impaired liver function should be more strictly selected, especially in the palliative subgroup.

Efficacy and safety of drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC): A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal management of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) remains an unresolved challenge. There is ongoing debate regarding the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting bead TACE (DEB-TACE) with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library for eligible studies. The main endpoints under investigation were survival outcomes, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time to progression (TTP). Secondary outcomes encompassed tumor response rates and adverse events (AEs). Two researchers conducted the data extraction independently and assessed the quality of the studies. After pooling and analyzing the data, we assessed the heterogeneity and performed both subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis. Additionally, we evaluated the potential for publication bias.

RESULTS

Eight studies with 1513 patients were finally retrieved. Compared to monotherapy, although bigeminal therapy exhibited improved survival benefits (OS: HR: 0.56, 95 % CI 0.41-0.76, p < 0.001; TTP: HR: 0.72, 95 % CI 0.59-0.87, p = 0.001) and tumor response (ORR: RR: 1.59; 95 % CI 1.19-2.13, p = 0.002; DCR: RR: 1.14; 95 % CI 1.03-1.26, p = 0.010), the reliability of results was affected by significant heterogeneity. In the subgroup analysis, compared to DEB-TACE alone, the bigeminal therapy failed to show any statistical differences. Compared to TKIs, it demonstrated significant advantages in both survival (OS: HR: 0.49, 95 % CI 0.40-0.61, p < 0.001; TTP: HR: 0.60, 95 % CI 0.48-0.75, p < 0.001) and tumor response (ORR: RR: 2.40, 95 % CI 1.86-3.09, p < 0.001; DCR: RR: 1.36, 95 % CI 1.20-1.54, p < 0.001) while low heterogeneity was observed. Concerning safety, DEB-TACE provides no more severe AEs while TKIs-related AEs require close monitoring.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that DEB-TACE combined with TKIs may be a safe and effective treatment for uHCC, which is more suitable for patients in the advanced stage.