Scholarlink

Background <p>The optimal clinical management of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) is challenging for clinicians. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of different interventional strategies for uHCC.</p> Methods <p>A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CNKI databases. Bayesian network meta-analysis was applied to evaluate the disease control rate (DCR), 1-year survival rate and 2-year survival rate, as well as the incidence of serious adverse events associated with seven interventional strategies. Odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. Treatment rankings utilized surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), whereas heterogeneity was examined via I-square and meta-regression.</p> Results <p>A total of 40 randomized controlled studies were included. Compared with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) alone, all of the combination treatments, including TACE with radiofrequency ablation (RFA), microwave ablation (MWA), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), and radiotherapy (RT), significantly improved the DCR. TACE combined with RFA was observed to be superior to hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) (OR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.03–3.81) and TACE (OR: 3.85; 95% CI: 2.66–5.69), with the highest probability (SUCRA 0.836). TACE combined with HIFU ranks highest 1-year survival (SUCRA 0.919) and 2-year survival (SUCRA 0.925) rates, and also exhibited a better 1-year survival rate than HAIC (OR: 2.99; 95% CI: 1.09–9.03). Compared with TACE alone, HAIC exhibited a greater DCR (OR: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.15–3.40) and a potential advantage in 2-year survival (OR: 1.95; 95% CI: 1.02–3.78). No significant differences in serious adverse events were observed across treatments.</p> Conclusions <p>Compared with TACE alone, combined treatments for uHCC patients demonstrates better efficacy and survival. Moreover, compared with TACE and HAIC, TACE combined with RFA provides better efficacy, whereas TACE combined with HIFU offers the highest 1-year survival rate. HAIC alone outperforms TACE in DCR and 2-year survival rate.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A network meta-analysis of different interventional treatment strategies for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年5月12日

查看全文
  • Xing-Yan Le,
  • Jun-Bang Feng,
  • Xiao-Li Yu,
  • Sui-Li Li,
  • Xiaocai Zhang,
  • Jiaqing Li,
  • Chuan-Ming Li

摘要

Background

The optimal clinical management of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) is challenging for clinicians. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of different interventional strategies for uHCC.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CNKI databases. Bayesian network meta-analysis was applied to evaluate the disease control rate (DCR), 1-year survival rate and 2-year survival rate, as well as the incidence of serious adverse events associated with seven interventional strategies. Odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. Treatment rankings utilized surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), whereas heterogeneity was examined via I-square and meta-regression.

Results

A total of 40 randomized controlled studies were included. Compared with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) alone, all of the combination treatments, including TACE with radiofrequency ablation (RFA), microwave ablation (MWA), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), and radiotherapy (RT), significantly improved the DCR. TACE combined with RFA was observed to be superior to hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) (OR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.03–3.81) and TACE (OR: 3.85; 95% CI: 2.66–5.69), with the highest probability (SUCRA 0.836). TACE combined with HIFU ranks highest 1-year survival (SUCRA 0.919) and 2-year survival (SUCRA 0.925) rates, and also exhibited a better 1-year survival rate than HAIC (OR: 2.99; 95% CI: 1.09–9.03). Compared with TACE alone, HAIC exhibited a greater DCR (OR: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.15–3.40) and a potential advantage in 2-year survival (OR: 1.95; 95% CI: 1.02–3.78). No significant differences in serious adverse events were observed across treatments.

Conclusions

Compared with TACE alone, combined treatments for uHCC patients demonstrates better efficacy and survival. Moreover, compared with TACE and HAIC, TACE combined with RFA provides better efficacy, whereas TACE combined with HIFU offers the highest 1-year survival rate. HAIC alone outperforms TACE in DCR and 2-year survival rate.