Drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) exhibits superior efficacy and equal tolerance to conventional TACE in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with conventional TACE history

Efficacy of CalliSpheres® microspheres versus conventional transarterial chemoembolization in the treatment of refractory colorectal cancer liver metastasis

OBJECTIVE

CalliSpheres® is a microsphere that is already widely used for primary liver cancer treatment; however, its application in colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) is limited. The current study aimed to investigate the efficacy of CalliSpheres® drug-eluting bead (DEB) transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) therapy versus (vs.) conventional cTACE therapy in treating refractory CRLM (RCRLM) patients.

METHODS

Twenty-two RCRLM patients who underwent CalliSpheres® DEB-TACE therapy (n = 11) or cTACE therapy (n = 11) were retrospectively analyzed. Data on clinical response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were retrieved.

RESULTS

The objective response rate (36.4% vs. 18.2%, P = 0.338) and disease control rate (81.8% vs. 54.4%, P = 0.170) were both numerically (but not statistically) higher in the DEB-TACE group than in the cTACE group. Meanwhile, PFS was prolonged in the DEB-TACE group compared with the cTACE group [median: 12.0 (95% CI: 5.6-18.4) vs. 4.0 (95% CI: 0.9-7.1) months, P = 0.018]; OS was also longer in the DEB-TACE group compared with the cTACE group [median: 24.0 (95% CI: 18.3-29.7) vs. 14.0 (95% CI: 7.1-20.9) months, P = 0.040]. In addition, after adjustment by multivariate Cox analyses, DEB-TACE was superior to cTACE independently regarding PFS (HR: 0.110, 95% CI: 0.026-0.463, P = 0.003) and OS (HR: 0.126, 95% CI: 0.028-0.559, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

CalliSpheres® DEB-TACE therapy may prolong survival profile than cTACE therapy in RCRLM patients, while further validation is still needed.

Comparison of the Treatment Response of Drug-Eluting Bead Transarterial Chemoembolization and Conventional Transarterial Chemoembolization in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Introduction Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common primary hepatic cancer. Its early diagnosis can aid in its treatment by curative means such as surgery or ablation. Advanced-stage diagnosis limits these treatment options, and such cases can be treated with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). Conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) and drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) are usually used, and follow-up response is evaluated using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) criteria. This study was done to compare the treatment response of cTACE and DEB-TACE in patients with HCC. Materials and methods A retrospective review of electronic medical records of all patients diagnosed with HCC from January 2021 to August 2022 who underwent cTACE or DEB-TACE was undertaken at the Department of Interventional Radiology, Indus Hospital and Health Network. Both male and female patients aged 18 years or above with Child-Pugh class A and B were included. DEB-TACE or cTACE was performed by a fellowship-trained interventional radiologist, and the response was evaluated at six weeks follow-up using mRECIST criteria. Results A total of 129 patients were included in this study, with a mean age of 54.1 ± 10.8 years. The mean size of HCC was 3.1 ± 1.7 cm. Seventy-eight (60.5%) patients underwent cTACE, and 51 (39.5%) underwent DEB-TACE. Out of the 78 patients who underwent cTACE, complete response (CR) was found in 28 (35.9%), partial response (PR) was found in 33 (42.3%), stable disease (SD) was found in 12 (15.4%), and progressive disease (PD) was found in five (6.4%) patients. Of the 51 patients who underwent DEB-TACE, CR was found in 13 (25.5%), PR was found in 20 (39.2%), SD was found in 11 (21.6%), and PD was found in seven (13.7%) patients. Conclusion The response rate of TACE in the form of complete or partial response was higher with a lower frequency of stable or progressive disease. cTACE has a high response rate as compared to DEB-TACE.

Efficacy and Safety of Drug-Eluting Bead TACE in the Treatment of Primary or Secondary Liver Cancer

Background

The drug-eluting beads transarterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) has already been used in hepatic malignancies. We aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DEB-TACE in treating primary or secondary liver cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 59 patients with hepatic malignancies, including 41 patients with primary liver cancer and 18 patients with secondary liver cancer, between September 2016 and February 2019. All patients were treated with DEB-TACE. Objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were evaluated by mRECIST. The pain was assessed using a numerical rating scale (NRS) where 0 represented no pain, and a score of ten was unbearable. Adverse reactions were assessed according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events 4.0 (CTCAE4.0).

Results

In the subgroup of primary liver cancer, 3 patients (7.32%) got complete response, 13 patients (31.71%) got partial response, 21 patients (51.22%) experienced stable disease, and 4 patients (9.76%) suffered progressive disease; ORR was 39.02% and DCR was 90.24%. In the subgroup of secondary liver cancer, 0 patients (0%) got complete response, 6 patients (33.33%) got partial response, 11 patients (61.11%) experienced stable disease, and 1 patient (5.56%) suffered progressive disease; ORR was 33.33% and DCR was 94.44%. We did not find any difference when comparing the efficacy between primary and secondary liver cancer (P=0.612). The one-year survival rate was 70.73% for primary liver cancer and 61.11% for secondary liver cancer. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P=0.52). For the patients with CR or PR, no factor could predict the efficacy of DEB-TACE. The most common treatment-related adverse reactions were short-term liver function disorders. The symptoms included fever (20.34%), abdomen pain (16.95%), and vomiting (5.08%), all patients with adverse reactions got remission after treatment.

Conclusions

DEB-TACE has a promising effect in the treatment of primary or secondary liver cancer. The treatment-related adverse reactions are tolerable.

Efficacy and Safety of TACE Combined with Regorafenib versus TACE in the Third-Line Treatment of Colorectal Liver Metastases

BACKGROUND

The liver is the most common site of metastasis in colorectal cancer. In patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases, the 5-year survival rate is less than 5%. Many patients with colorectal liver metastases require effective subsequent therapy after the failure of standard first-line/second-line therapy. The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of TACE combined with Regorafenib versus TACE in the third-line treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases.

METHOD

The clinical data of 132 patients with colorectal liver metastases were collected. There were two groups: TACE + Regorafenib group (N = 63); TACE group (N = 69). TACE uses CalliSpheres® drug-loaded microspheres (loaded with irinotecan). Regorafenib is administered at a dose of 120 mg once daily. If the patient is severely intolerable, the regorafenib dose is adjusted to 80 mg once daily. Primary study endpoints were (1) to evaluate the tumor response, ORR, and DCR and (2) to evaluate OS and PFS in the two groups. Secondary study endpoints were (1) to compare the performance status, CEA, CA19-9 after treatment between the two groups and (2) to compare the incidence of adverse events between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in tumor response, ORR, DCR, OS, and PFS after treatment between the two groups. TACE combined with the Regorafenib group versus the TACE group: ORR (57.1% vs 33.3%), DCR (82.5% vs 68.1%), mOS (18.2 months vs 11.3 months), and mPFS (8.9 months vs 5.3 months). The performance status after treatment was better in the TACE + Regorafenib group than in the TACE group (P < 0.05). The CEA and CA19-9 negative rates after treatment were higher in the TACE + Regorafenib group than in the TACE group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

For the third-line treatment of colorectal liver metastases, the combination of TACE + Regorafenib had better tumor response, OS, and PFS than TACE TACE + Regorafenib combination could be considered as salvage therapy for colorectal liver metastases who failed the first- and second-line standard therapy.