Transarterial Chemoembolization Combined with Either Radiofrequency or Microwave Ablation in Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Egyptian Society of Liver Cancer Recommendation Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Globally, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fourth most common cause of death from cancer. The prevalence of this pathology, which has been on the rise in the last 30 years, has been predicted to continue increasing. HCC is the most common cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in Egypt and is also the most common cancer in males. Chronic liver diseases, including chronic hepatitis C, which is a primary health concern in Egypt, are considered major risk factors for HCC. However, HCC surveillance is recommended for patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) and liver cirrhosis; those above 40 with HBV but without cirrhosis; individuals with hepatitis D co-infection or a family history of HCC; and Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) patients exhibiting significant fibrosis or cirrhosis. Several international guidelines aid physicians in the management of HCC. However, the availability and cost of diagnostic modalities and treatment options vary from one country to another. Therefore, the current guidelines aim to standardize the management of HCC in Egypt. The recommendations presented in this report represent the current management strategy at HCC treatment centers in Egypt. Recommendations were developed by an expert panel consisting of hepatologists, oncologists, gastroenterologists, surgeons, pathologists, and radiologists working under the umbrella of the Egyptian Society of Liver Cancer. The recommendations, which are based on the currently available local diagnostic aids and treatments in the country, include recommendations for future prospects.

Optimal treatment for small HCC (<3 cm): Resection, liver transplantation, or locoregional therapy?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains the most common form of liver cancer, accounting for 90% of all primary liver cancers. Up to 30% of HCC cases could be small (2-3 cm in diameter) at the time of diagnosis with advances in imaging techniques and surveillance programmes. Treating patients with early-stage HCC can be complex and often requires interdisciplinary care, owing to the wide and increasing variety of treatment options, which include liver resection, liver transplantation, and various locoregional therapies offered by interventional radiology and radiation oncology. Decisions regarding the optimal management strategy for a patient involve many considerations, including patient- and tumour-specific characteristics, as well as socioeconomic factors. In this review, we aim to comprehensively summarise the commonly used therapies for single, small HCC (<3 cm), with a focus on the impact of tumour size (<2 cm vs. 2-3 cm), as well as a brief discussion on the cost-effectiveness of the different treatment options.

Transarterial Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Why, When, How?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver malignancy. It is principally associated with liver cirrhosis and chronic liver disease. The major risk factors for the development of HCC include viral infections (HBV, HCV), alcoholic liver disease (ALD,) and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The optimal treatment choice is dictated by multiple variables such as tumor burden, liver function, and patient’s health status. Surgical resection, transplantation, ablation, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), and systemic therapy are potentially useful treatment strategies. TACE is considered the first-line treatment for patients with intermediate stage HCC. The purpose of this review was to assess the indications, the optimal treatment schedule, the technical factors associated with TACE, and the overall application of TACE as a personalized treatment for HCC.

Radiofrequency ablation in the management of primary hepatic and biliary tumors

In the United States, 80%-90% of primary hepatic tumors are hepatocellular carcinomas and 10%-15% are cholangiocarcinomas (CCA), both with high mortality rate, particularly CCA, which portends a worse prognosis. Traditional management with surgery has good outcomes in appropriately selected patients; however, novel ablative treatment options have emerged, such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA), which can improve the prognosis of both hepatic and biliary tumors. RFA is aimed to generate an area of necrosis within the targeted tissue by applying thermal therapy via an electrode, with a goal to completely eradicate the tumor while preserving surrounding healthy tissue. Role of RFA in management of hepatic and biliary tumors forms the focus of our current mini-review article.

Combined treatments in hepatocellular carcinoma: Time to put them in the guidelines?

The time for battling cancer has never been more suitable than nowadays and fortunately against hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) we do have a far-reaching arsenal. Moreover, because liver cancer comprises a plethora of stages-from very early to advanced disease and with many treatment options–from surgery to immunotherapy trials–it leaves the clinician a wide range of options. The scope of our review is to throw light on combination treatments that seem to be beyond guidelines and to highlight these using evidence-based analysis of the most frequently used combination therapies, discussing their advantages and flaws in comparison to the current standard of care. One particular combination therapy seems to be in the forefront: Transarterial chemoembolization plus ablation for medium-size non-resectable HCC (3-5 cm), which is currently at the frontier between Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer classification A and B. Not only does it improve the outcome in contrast to each individual therapy, but it also seems to have similar results to surgery. Also, the abundance of immune checkpoint inhibitors that have appeared lately in clinical trials are bringing promising results against HCC. Although the path of combination therapies in HCC is still filled with uncertainty and caveats, in the following years the hepatology and oncology fields could witness an HCC guideline revolution.

Comparison of intrahepatic progression patterns of hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases following CT-guided high dose-rate brachytherapy

Introduction:

Given the metachronous and multifocal occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal cancer metastases in the liver (CRLM), this study aimed to compare intrahepatic progression patterns after computed tomography (CT)-guided high dose-rate brachytherapy.

Patients and methods:

This retrospective analysis included 164 patients (114 HCC, 50 CRLM) treated with brachytherapy between January 2016 and January 2018. Patients received multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before, and about 8 weeks after brachytherapy, then every 3 months for the first, and every 6 months for the following years, until progression or death. MRI scans were assessed for local or distant intrahepatic tumor progression according to RECIST 1.1 and electronic medical records were reviewed prior to therapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Specifically, local and distant intra-hepatic PFS were assessed to determine differences between the intrahepatic progression patterns of HCC and CRLM. Secondary endpoints included the identification of predictors of PFS, time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). Statistics included Kaplan–Meier analysis and univariate and multivariate Cox regression modeling.

Results:

PFS was longer in HCC [11.30 (1.33–35.37) months] than in CRLM patients [8.03 (0.73–19.80) months, p = 0.048], respectively. Specifically, local recurrence occurred later in HCC [PFS: 36.83 (1.33–40.27) months] than CRLM patients [PFS: 12.43 (0.73–21.90) months, p = 0.001]. In contrast, distant intrahepatic progression occurred earlier in HCC [PFS: 13.50 (1.33–27.80) months] than in CRLM patients [PFS: 19.80 (1.43–19.80) months, p = 0.456] but without statistical significance. Multivariate Cox regression confirmed tumor type and patient age as independent predictors for PFS.

Conclusion:

Brachytherapy proved to achieve better local tumor control and overall PFS in patients with unresectable HCC as compared to those with CRLM. However, distant progression preceded local recurrence in HCC. As a result, these findings may help design disease-specific surveillance strategies and personalized treatment planning that highlights the strengths of brachytherapy. They may also help elucidate the potential benefits of combinations with other loco-regional or systemic therapies.

The clinical efficiency of TACE combined with simultaneous computed tomography-guided radiofrequency ablation for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Background To investigate the clinical efficiency of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods This retrospective study enrolled 177 HCC patients, and they were divided into TACE monotherapy group (n = 129) and TACE + RFA group (n = 48) between January 2015 and October 2017. The objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and the survival outcomes were compared between the TACE monotherapy and the treatment of TACE + RFA after propensity score matching (PSM). Results After PSM matching, the confounding factors had no significant differences between the 48 pairs of patients. The DCR was calculated as 33 (69 %) and 42 (88 %) for the TACE monotherapy group and TACE + RFA group, respectively (P < 0.05). And the ORR was calculated as 23 (48 %) and 35 (73 %), respectively (P < 0.05). Moreover, the PFS rate of the TACE + RFA group was significantly higher than the TACE alone group (P < 0.001). Conclusions The treatment of TACE combined with RFA has better tumor response rate and survival rate than the TACE monotherapy for patients with advanced HCC.

Ablative therapies for hepatic and biliary tumors: endohepatology coming of age

Ablative therapies refer to minimally invasive procedures performed to destroy abnormal tissue that may arise with many conditions, and can be achieved clinically using chemical, thermal, and other techniques. In this review article, we explore the different ablative therapies used in the management of hepatic and biliary malignancies, namely hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), with a particular focus on radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and photodynamic therapy (PDT) techniques.

Multiple imaging modality-guided radiofrequency ablation combined with transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma in special locations

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) combined with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) guided by multiple imaging modalities for hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) in special (i.e., high-risk or unfavorable) locations compared with those in conventional locations.

METHODS

A total of 122 HCC patients were enrolled, including 85 patients (69.7%) with HCC in conventional locations and 37 (30.3%) with HCC in special locations. The clinical data, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and procedure-related adverse events were analyzed.

RESULTS

RFA combined with TACE was successfully performed in all patients. Three complications (2.5%) occurred, with no significant difference between the conventional (n=1, 1.2%) and special (n=2, 5.4%) locations (P = 0.218). Complete tumor necrosis rate was not significantly different between the conventional (n=73, 85.9%) and special (n=34, 91.9%) locations at one-month imaging (P = 0.353). After a follow-up of 3-48 months, the PFS was 17 months for patients with HCC in conventional locations and 14 months for patients with HCC in special locations; one-year PFS rate was 68.1% in the conventional location group, not significantly (P = 0.741) different from 59.1% in the special location group. The OS was 28 months in the conventional location group while 32 months in the special location group. The cumulative one- and two-year OS rates were 89.9% and 63.3%, respectively, in the conventional location group, not significantly different from 96.3% and 65% in the special location group (P = 0.273). Age (P = 0.043) and tumor size (P < 0.001) were significant prognostic factors for OS, and tumor size (P < 0.001) was the only significant prognostic factor for PFS.

CONCLUSION

RFA guided by multiple imaging modalities combined with TACE may be safe and effective for treating HCCs in special locations.

The Combination Strategy of Transarterial Chemoembolization and Radiofrequency Ablation or Microwave Ablation against Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary cancer of the liver. Hepatectomy and liver transplantation (LT) are regarded as the radical treatment, but great majority of patients are already in advanced stage on the first diagnosis and lose the surgery opportunity. Multifarious image-guided interventional therapies, termed as locoregional ablations, are recommended by various HCC guidelines for the clinical practice. Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is firstly recommended for intermediate-stage (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) B class) HCC but has lower necrosis rates. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is effective in treating HCCs smaller than 3 cm in size. Microwave ablation (MWA) can ablate larger tumor within a shorter time. Combination of TACE with RFA or MWA is effective and promising in treating larger HCC lesions but needs more clinical data to confirm its long-term outcome. The combination of TACE and RFA or MWA against hepatocellular carcinoma needs more clinical data for a better strategy. The characters and advantages of TACE, RFA, MWA, and TACE combined with RFA or MWA are reviewed to provide physician a better background on decision.

Radiofrequency Ablation and Microwave Ablation in Liver Tumors: An Update

This article provides an overview of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) for treatment of primary liver tumors and hepatic metastasis. Only studies reporting RFA and MWA safety and efficacy on liver were retained. We found 40 clinical studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria. RFA has become an established treatment modality because of its efficacy, reproducibility, low complication rates, and availability. MWA has several advantages over RFA, which may make it more attractive to treat hepatic tumors. According to the literature, the overall survival, local recurrence, complication rates, disease-free survival, and mortality in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with RFA vary between 53.2 ± 3.0 months and 66 months, between 59.8% and 63.1%, between 2% and 10.5%, between 22.0 ± 2.6 months and 39 months, and between 0% and 1.2%, respectively. According to the literature, overall survival, local recurrence, complication rates, disease-free survival, and mortality in patients with HCC treated with MWA (compared with RFA) vary between 22 months for focal lesion >3 cm (vs. 21 months) and 50 months for focal lesion ≤3 cm (vs. 27 months), between 5% (vs. 46.6%) and 17.8% (vs. 18.2%), between 2.2% (vs. 0%) and 61.5% (vs. 45.4%), between 14 months (vs. 10.5 months) and 22 months (vs. no data reported), and between 0% (vs. 0%) and 15% (vs. 36%), respectively. According to the literature, the overall survival, local recurrence, complication rates, and mortality in liver metastases patients treated with RFA (vs. MWA) are not statistically different for both the survival times from primary tumor diagnosis and survival times from ablation, between 10% (vs. 6%) and 35.7% (vs. 39.6), between 1.1% (vs. 3.1%) and 24% (vs. 27%), and between 0% (vs. 0%) and 2% (vs. 0.3%). MWA should be considered the technique of choice in selected patients, when the tumor is ≥3 cm in diameter or is close to large vessels, independent of its size. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Although technical features of the radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) are similar, the differences arise from the physical phenomenon used to generate heat. RFA has become an established treatment modality because of its efficacy, reproducibility, low complication rates, and availability. MWA has several advantages over RFA, which may make it more attractive than RFA to treat hepatic tumors. The benefits of MWA are an improved convection profile, higher constant intratumoral temperatures, faster ablation times, and the ability to use multiple probes to treat multiple lesions simultaneously. MWA should be considered the technique of choice when the tumor is ≥3 cm in diameter or is close to large vessels, independent of its size.

Nonviral Gene Therapy for Cancer: A Review

Although the development of effective viral vectors put gene therapy on the road to commercialization, nonviral vectors show promise for practical use because of their relative safety and lower cost. A significant barrier to the use of nonviral vectors, however, is that they have not yet proven effective. This apparent lack of interest can be attributed to the problem of the low gene transfer efficiency associated with nonviral vectors. The efficiency of gene transfer via nonviral vectors has been reported to be 1/10th to 1/1000th that of viral vectors. Despite the fact that new gene transfer methods and nonviral vectors have been developed, no significant improvements in gene transfer efficiency have been achieved. Nevertheless, some notable progress has been made. In this review, we discuss studies that report good results using nonviral vectors in vivo in animal models, with a particular focus on studies aimed at in vivo gene therapy to treat cancer, as this disease has attracted the interest of researchers developing nonviral vectors. We describe the conditions in which nonviral vectors work more efficiently for gene therapy and discuss how the goals might differ for nonviral versus viral vector development and use.

Comparison of the Efficacy and Prognostic Factors of Transarterial Chemoembolization Plus Microwave Ablation versus Transarterial Chemoembolization Alone in Patients with a Large Solitary or Multinodular Hepatocellular Carcinomas

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and prognostic factors associated with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with microwave ablation (MWA) versus TACE alone for a large solitary or multinodular hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs).

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study involved 258 patients with a large solitary or multinodular HCCs (not more than 10 tumors) who underwent TACE + MWA (n = 92) or TACE alone (n = 166) between July 2011 and April 2015. Local tumor control, survival outcomes, and complications were compared between the two groups. Prognostic factors for time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

The median duration of follow-up was 21.2 months (range, 4–45 months). The median TTP and OS were 12.5 months and 26.6 months, respectively, for the TACE + MWA group and 6.7 months and 17.1 months, respectively, for the TACE group (p < 0.001). The 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 85.9, 59.8, and 32.6%, respectively, for the TACE + MWA group and 59.0, 40.4, and 11.4%, respectively, for the TACE group (p < 0.001). The corresponding recurrence rates were 47.8, 78.3, and 94.6% for the TACE + MWA group, respectively, and 74.7, 96.4, and 97.6%, respectively, for the TACE group (p < 0.001). Logistic regression analyses showed that the treatment method, tumor size, and tumor number were significant prognostic factors for TTP and OS.

Conclusion

TACE + MWA appears to have more advantages compared to TACE in prolonging OS, with a satisfactory TTP, for inpatients with solitary large or multinodular HCCs. Treatment method, tumor size, and tumor number are significant prognostic factors for TTP and OS. Further randomized, multi-center, prospective trials are required to confirm the findings of this study.