...
首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Translational Research >Comparison of treatment efficacy and safety between drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization with CalliSpheres ? microspheres and conventional transarterial chemoembolization as first-line treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma patients
【24h】

Comparison of treatment efficacy and safety between drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization with CalliSpheres ? microspheres and conventional transarterial chemoembolization as first-line treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma patients

机译:用愈合栓塞药物洗脱珠霉变化疗栓塞治疗疗效和安全性比较吗? 微球和常规龙动化疗栓塞作为肝细胞癌患者的一线治疗

获取原文
           

摘要

We aimed to compare the treatment response, survivals and safety of drug-eluting bead (DEB) transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) with CalliSpheres ? microspheres (CSM) and conventional TACE (cTACE) as first-line treatment in Chinese HCC patients. 192 HCC patients from multiple centers received DEB-TACE with CSM or cTACE treatment as first-line treatment were included and assigned to DEB-TACE group (N=94) or cTACE group (N=98) accordingly. Treatment response was assessed at 1 month (M1), M3 and M6 after treatment. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was evaluated. Liver function indexes and adverse events were recorded. Complete response (CR) and objective response rate (ORR) were higher, while disease control rate (DCR) rate was similar in DEB-TACE group compared with cTACE group, and further multivariate logistic regression analysis validated that DEB-TACE vs cTACE independently predicted higher ORR. For survivals, no difference in PFS or OS was observed between DEB-TACE and cTACE groups, and multivariate Cox’s proportional hazards regression revealed that DEB-TACE vs cTACE was not correlated with PFS or OS either. Additionally, no difference in liver function indexes at M1 or changes of liver function indexes from M0 to M1 between DEB-TACE and cTACE groups after treatment was observed, whereas DEB-TACE resulted in higher incidence of pain and fever during treatment or hospitalization. DEB-TACE with CSM discloses better treatment response, similar survival profiles and equal liver function injury but increased incidence of short-term adverse events than cTACE as the first-line therapy in treating HCC patients.
机译:我们的旨在将药物洗脱珠(Deb)龙骨化疗(TACE)的治疗反应,幸存者和安全性进行比较吗?微球(CSM)和常规TACE(CTACE)作为中国HCC患者的一线治疗。 192年,来自多个中心的HCC患者接受了CSM或CTACE治疗的DEB-TACE作为初系治疗,并相应地将DEB-TACE组(N = 94)或CTACE组(N = 98)分配。治疗后1个月(M1),M3和M6评估治疗响应。评估无进展生存期(PFS)和总存活(OS)。记录了肝功能指标和不良事件。完整的响应(Cr)和客观反应率(ORR)较高,而疾病控制率(DCR)率与CTACE组相比类似于CTACE组,而进一步的多变量逻辑回归分析验证了DEB-TACE与CTACE独立预测更高的orr。对于幸存者,在DEB-TACE和CTACE组之间观察到PFS或OS的差异,并且多变量COX的比例危害回归显示,DEB-TACE VS CTACE也与PFS或OS相关。另外,在观察到治疗后,M1和M0至M1之间的肝功能指数的肝功能指数的差异没有差异,而在治疗后,在治疗后,在治疗后的肝脏和CTACE组之间的变化,而治疗或住院期间,DEB-TACE导致疼痛和发烧的发生率更高。与CSM的DEB-TACE公开了更好的治疗响应,类似的存活谱和等于肝功能损伤,而是比治疗HCC患者的一线治疗的短期不良事件的发病率增加。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号