Efficacy comparison of optimal treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma patients with portal vein tumor thrombus

Optimal treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) involving portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT) remains controversial. A total of 627 HCC patients with PVTT after initial treatment with one of the following at Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Guangxi Medical University: liver resection (LR, n = 225), tr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAnnals of hepatology Vol. 27; no. 1; p. 100552
Main Authors Zhang, Yu, Wu, Jun-Li, Li, Le-Qun
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Mexico Elsevier España, S.L.U 01.01.2022
Elsevier
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Optimal treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) involving portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT) remains controversial. A total of 627 HCC patients with PVTT after initial treatment with one of the following at Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Guangxi Medical University: liver resection (LR, n = 225), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE, n = 298) or sorafenib (n = 104) were recruited and randomly divided into the training cohort (n = 314) and internal validation cohort (n = 313). Survival analysis were repeated after stratifying patients by Cheng PVTT type. Resection led to significantly higher OS than the other two treatments among patients with type I or II PVTT. TACE worked significantly better than the other two treatments for patients with type III. All three treatments were associated with similar OS among patients with type IV. These findings were supported by the internal validation cohort. Our results suggest that the optimal treatment for HCC involving PVTT depends on the type of PVTT. LR may be more appropriate for type I or II PVTT; TACE, for type III Sorafenib may be more appropriate than invasive treatments for patients with type IV PVTT.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-News-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ISSN:1665-2681
2659-5982
DOI:10.1016/j.aohep.2021.100552