SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013
Transarterial (chemo)embolisation versus no intervention or placebo intervention for liver metastases.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transarterial (chemo)embolisation versus no intervention or placebo for liver metastases.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Exploring Microalgae as a Novel Resource for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Therapy.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Personalized prognosis in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: Development and validation of a model for transcatheter arterial chemoembolization plus lenvatinib.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- The survival impact of radiotherapy on synchronous metastatic rectal cancer: metastatic site can serve for radiotherapy-decision.Journal of Cancer · 2022Article
- Recent Advance in the Surgical Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer-An English Version.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2022Review
- Predictive and Prognostic Factors of Synchronous Colorectal Lung-Limited Metastasis.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2020Article
- The Nrf2 inhibitor brusatol is a potent antitumour agent in an orthotopic mouse model of colorectal cancer.Oncotarget · 2018Article
- The Role of Liver-Directed Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.Current colorectal cancer reports · 2018Review
- 18 F-FDG PET/MR imaging in patients with suspected liver lesions: Value of liver-specific contrast agent Gadobenate dimeglumine.PloS one · 2017Article
- Preoperative left hepatic lobe devascularisation to minimize perioperative bleeding in a Jehovah's Witness undergoing left hepatectomy.International journal of surgery case reports · 2017Article
- Radioembolization as a Treatment Strategy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer to the Liver: What Can We Learn from the SIRFLOX Trial?Current treatment options in oncology · 2016Review
- Article
- Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for colorectal liver metastases--current status and critical review.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary liver tumours and liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma are the two most common malignant tumours to affect the liver. The liver is second only to the lymph nodes as the most common site for metastatic disease. More than half of the patients with metastatic liver disease will die from metastatic complications. Chemoembolisation is based on the concept that the blood supply to hepatic tumours originates predominantly from the hepatic artery. Therefore, embolisation of the hepatic artery can lead to selective necrosis of the liver tumour while it may leave normal parenchyma virtually unaffected.
objectivesTo study the beneficial and harmful effects of transarterial (chemo)embolisation compared with no intervention or placebo intervention in patients with liver metastases. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, and CINAHL up to December 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised clinical trials assessing beneficial and harmful effects of transarterial (chemo)embolisation compared with no intervention or placebo intervention in patients with liver metastases, no matter the location of the primary tumour. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted relevant information on participant characteristics, interventions, study outcome measures, and data on the outcome measures for our review as well as information on the design and methodology of the studies. Bias risk assessment of the trials, fulfilling the inclusion criteria, and data extraction from the retrieved final evaluation trials were done by one author and checked by a second author. MAIN
resultsOne randomised clinical trial fulfilled the inclusion criteria of the review. Sixty-one patients with colorectal liver metastases were randomised into three intervention groups: 22 received hepatic artery embolisation, 19 received hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy, and 20 were randomised to control, described as "no active therapeutic intervention, although symptomatic treatment was provided whenever necessary". As hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy is not in the scope of this review, we have not included the data from this intervention group. In the remaining two groups that were of interest to the review, 43 of the participants were men and 18 women. Most tumours were synchronous metastases involving up to 75% of the liver and non-resectable. The risk of bias in the trial was judged to be high.Patients were followed-up for a minimum of seven months. Mortality at last follow-up was 86% (19/22) in the hepatic artery embolisation group versus 95% (19/20) in the control group (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.1), that is, no statistically significant difference was observed. Median survival after trial entry was 7.0 months (range 2 to 44) in the hepatic artery embolisation group and 7.9 months (range 1 to 26) in the control group. Nine out of 22 (41%) in the hepatic artery embolisation group and five out of 20 (25%) in the control group developed evidence of extrahepatic disease (RR 1.64; 95% CI 0.60 to 4.07). Local recurrence was reported for 10 patients in the trial without details about the trial group. Most patients in the embolisation group experienced post-embolic syndrome (82%), and one patient had local haematoma. No other adverse events were reported. The authors did not report if there were any adverse events in the control group. AUTHORS'
conclusionsOn the basis of one small randomised trial that did not describe sequence generation, allocation concealment or blinding, it can be concluded that in patients with liver metastases no significant survival benefit or benefit on extrahepatic recurrence was found in the embolisation group in comparison with the palliation group. The probability for selective outcome reporting bias in the trial is high. At present, transarterial (chemo)embolisation cannot be recommended outside randomised clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.