Partial hepatectomy versus interventional treatment in patients with hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma and clinically significant portal hypertension: a randomized comparative clinical trial
Yichuan Yuan , Hong Peng , Wei He , Yun Zheng , Jiliang Qiu , Bin Chen , Ruhai Zou , Chenwei Wang , Wan Yee Lau , Binkui Li , Yunfei Yuan
Cancer Communications ›› 2024, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (11) : 1337 -1349.
Partial hepatectomy versus interventional treatment in patients with hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma and clinically significant portal hypertension: a randomized comparative clinical trial
Background: The widely accepted view that portal hypertension (PHT) is a contraindication to hepatectomy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is being increasingly challenged. The long-term survival outcomes and safety of partial hepatectomy versus interventional treatment using ablation with or without pre-ablation transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with HBV-related HCC within the Milan criteria and with clinically significant PHT were compared in this study.
Methods: This open-label randomized clinical trial was conducted on consecutive patients with clinically PHT and hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related HCC with tumors which were within the Milan criteria. These patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either partial hepatectomy or interventional treatment between December 2012 and June 2018. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints included recurrence-free survival (RFS) and therapeutic safety.
Results: Each of the 2 groups had 80 patients. The 1-, 3- and 5-year OS rates in the partial hepatectomy group and the interventional treatment group were 95.0%, 86.2%, 69.5% versus 93.8%, 77.5%, 64.9%, respectively (P = 0.325). The corresponding RFS rates were 78.8%, 55.0%, 46.2% versus 71.3%, 52.5%, 45.0%, respectively (P = 0.783). The partial hepatectomy group had a higher complication rate compared to the interventional group (67.5% vs. 20%, P < 0.001). However, the differences were mainly in Clavien-Dindo Grade I complications (P < 0.001), while not significant in Grade II/III/IV/V (All P > 0.05).
Conclusions: This study shows that partial hepatectomy treatment did not meet prespecified significance for improved OS and RFS compared to interventional treatment for patients with HBV-related HCC within the Milan criteria and with clinically significant PHT. However, partial hepatectomy is still a safe procedure and should be considered as a treatment option rather than a contraindication.
hepatocellular carcinoma / portal hypertension / partial hepatectomy / interventional treatment
| [1] |
|
| [2] |
|
| [3] |
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
European Association for the Study of the Liver & European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. EASL–EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2012; 56(4): 908-43. |
| [23] |
Chinese Medical Association. Expert consensus on clinical diagnosis and treatment of portal hypertension with hepatocellular carcinoma (2022). Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2022; 60(4): 310-20. |
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
|
2024 The Author(s). Cancer Communications published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |