ArticleCancer management and research2021
Efficacy of Drug-Eluting Beads Transarterial Chemoembolization Plus Apatinib Compared with Conventional Transarterial Chemoembolization Plus Apatinib in the Treatment of Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Drug-eluting beads chemoembolization combined with programmed cell death 1 inhibitor and lenvatinib for large hepatocellular carcinoma.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Efficacy of Drug-Eluting Beads Transarterial Chemoembolization Plus Camrelizumab Compared With Conventional Transarterial Chemoembolization Plus Camrelizumab for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting beads TACE plus apatinib (D-TACE-A) with those of conventional TACE plus apatinib (C-TACE-A) for the treatment of unresectable HCC.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 187 consecutive patients who received TACE plus apatinib in our institution from January 1, 2017, to July 1, 2019. Among them, 91 patients received C-TACE-A, and 96 patients received D-TACE-A. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and disease control rate (DCR). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce selection bias.
resultsBefore PSM, the median OS was 15 months (95% CI: 12.5-17.5) and 13 months (95% CI: 11.1-14.9; P=0.480) in the C-TACE-A and D-TACE-A groups, respectively. The median PFS was 7 months (95% CI: 5.9-8.1) in the C-TACE-A group and 7 months (95% CI: 5.6-8.4; p=0.677) in the D-TACE-A group. The DCR was 81.3% in the C-TACE-A group and 72.9% in the D-TACE-A group. Cox regression analysis showed that D-TACE-A did not increase mortality risk or tumor recurrence risk. After PSM, there was no statistically significant difference in median OS or PFS between the two groups. In the subgroup analysis, after adjusting for relative factors, D-TACE-A increased the mortality risk more than C-TACE-A in patients with BCLC stage C (HR: 1.678, 95% CI: 1.129-2.495; P=0.011), but D-TACE-A lowered the tumor recurrence risk compared with C-TACE-A in patients with Child-Pugh B (HR: 0.210, 95% CI: 0.082-0.538; P=0.001) and cirrhosis (HR: 0.481, 95% CI: 0.293-0.791; P=0.004). Grade III and IV adverse events in patients with D-TACE-A were similar to those in patients treated with C-TACE-A (P>0.05).
conclusionPatients with unresectable HCC treated with D-TACE-A might not show increased survival compared with patients treated with C-TACE-A. Advanced HCC patients without cirrhosis may receive greater survival benefits from C-TACE-A than D-TACE-A.
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.