Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33893536›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2021

Drug-eluting beads TACE is safe and non-inferior to conventional TACE in HCC patients with TIPS.

Wenzhe Fan, Jian Guo, Bowen Zhu, Shutong Wang, Lei Yu, Wanchang Huang, Huishuang Fan, Fuliang Li, Yanqin Wu, Yue Zhao and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Current Evidence on Local Therapies in Advanced Adrenocortical Carcinoma.Hormone and metabolic research = Hormon- und Stoffwechselforschung = Hormones et metabolisme · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Wenzhe FanDepartment of Interventional Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan 2nd Road, Guangzhou, 510080, People's Republic of China.
Jian GuoDepartment of Interventional Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan 2nd Road, Guangzhou, 510080, People's Republic of China.
Bowen ZhuDepartment of Interventional Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan 2nd Road, Guangzhou, 510080, People's Republic of China.
Shutong WangDepartment of Hepatic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Lei YuDepartment of Interventional Radiology, The People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Guangxi, People's Republic of China.
Wanchang HuangDepartment of Interventional Radiology, The First People's Hospital of Yulin, Guangxi, People's Republic of China.
Huishuang FanInterventional Department, Dongguan People's Hospital, Dongguan, People's Republic of China.
Fuliang LiLiver and Gall Surgical Department, Gaozhou People's Hospital, Gaozhou, People's Republic of China.
Yanqin WuDepartment of Interventional Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan 2nd Road, Guangzhou, 510080, People's Republic of China.
Yue ZhaoDepartment of Interventional Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan 2nd Road, Guangzhou, 510080, People's Republic of China.
Yu WangDepartment of Interventional Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan 2nd Road, Guangzhou, 510080, People's Republic of China.
Miao XueDepartment of Interventional Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan 2nd Road, Guangzhou, 510080, People's Republic of China.
Hongyu WangDepartment of Interventional Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan 2nd Road, Guangzhou, 510080, People's Republic of China.
Jiaping LiDepartment of Interventional Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan 2nd Road, Guangzhou, 510080, People's Republic of China. lijiap@mail.sysu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2927-8877
Sun Yat-sen University · CNDongguan People’s Hospital · CNFirst People's Hospital of Nanning · CNGaozhou People's Hospital · CNThe People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81671797National Natural Science Foundation of China 81701799Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province 2016A030310177
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study aims to compare the safety and effectiveness between transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) with drug-eluting beads (DEB-TACE) and conventional TACE (cTACE) using lipiodol-based regimens in HCC patients with a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).

methodsThis retrospective study included patients with patent TIPS who underwent TACE from January 2013 to January 2019 that received either DEB-TACE (DEB-TACE group, n = 57) or cTACE (cTACE group, n = 62). The complications, liver toxicity, overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), and objective response rate (ORR) were compared between the groups.

resultsAltogether, 119 patients (50 ± 11 years, 107 men) were evaluated. The incidence of adverse events, including abdominal pain within 7 days (45.6% vs 79.0%, p < 0.001) and hepatic failure within 30 days (5.3% vs 19.4%, p = 0.027), were significantly lower in the DEB-TACE group than in the cTACE group. Compared to the cTACE group, the DEB-TACE group also showed mild liver toxicities in terms of increased total bilirubin (8.8% vs 22.6%), alanine aminotransferase (5.3% vs 21.0%), and aspartate aminotransferase (10.5% vs 29.0%) levels. The DEB-TACE group had better ORR than the cTACE group (70.2% vs 50.0%). The median OS and TTP were longer in the DEB-TACE group (11.4 vs 9.1 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 2.46, p < 0.001; 6.9 vs 5.2 months, HR = 1.47, p = 0.045). Multivariable analysis showed that α-fetoprotein levels, Barcelona clinic liver cancer stage, and treatment allocation were independent predictors of OS.

conclusionDEB-TACE is safe and effective in HCC patients with a TIPS and is potentially superior to cTACE in terms of complications, liver toxicities, OS, TTP, and ORR. KEY POINTS: • DEB-TACE is safe and effective in HCC patients after a TIPS procedure. • DEB-TACE improves overall survival, objective response rate, and liver toxicities and is non-inferior to cTACE in terms of time to progression. • DEB-TACE might be a potential new therapeutic option for HCC patients with TIPS.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularChemoembolization, TherapeuticLiver NeoplasmsPharmaceutical PreparationsHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomePharmaceutical PreparationsCarcinoma, hepatocellularChemmembolizatioin, therapeuticPortasystemic shunt, transjugular intrahepatic

Identifiers

PMID33893536
PMCPMC8523393
OpenAlexW3156347271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.