Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine III, AKH and Medical University of Vienna, Austria.
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine III, AKH and Medical University of Vienna, Austria.
J Hepatol. 2014 Jan;60(1):118-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2013.08.022. Epub 2013 Sep 3.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Recently, we developed the ART score (assessment for re-treatment with TACE) to guide the decision for a second transarterial chemoembolization (TACE-2) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Patients with an ART score of 0-1.5 points gained benefit from a second TACE session, while patients with an ART score ≥2.5 points did not. Here, we investigated (1) the prognostic significance of the ART score prior to the third (TACE-3) and fourth TACE (TACE-4), and (2) the feasibility of an ART score guided re-treatment strategy by sequential assessment of the ART score in HCC patients treated with multiple TACE sessions.
109 patients, diagnosed with intermediate stage HCC and treated with ≥3 TACE sessions between January 1999 and December 2009 at the Medical Universities of Vienna and Innsbruck, were included. The ART score prior to each TACE session was assessed in comparison to the TACE naïve liver. The prognostic performance of the ART score before TACE-3 and 4 was evaluated with and without stratification based on the ART score prior to the respective last intervention.
The pre-TACE-3 ART score discriminated two groups with different prognosis and remained a valid predictor of OS independent of Child-Pugh score (5-7 points), CRP-levels and tumor characteristics. Even in patients with an initially beneficial ART score (0-1.5 points) before TACE-2, repeated ART score assessment before TACE-3 identified a subgroup of patients with dismal prognosis (median OS: 27.8 vs. 10.8 months, p<0.001). Similar results were observed when the ART score was applied before TACE-4.
The sequential assessment of the ART score identifies patients with dismal prognosis prior to each TACE session.
最近,我们开发了 ART 评分(评估再次接受 TACE 治疗的可能性),以指导肝细胞癌(HCC)患者进行第二次经动脉化疗栓塞(TACE-2)。ART 评分为 0-1.5 分的患者从第二次 TACE 中获益,而 ART 评分≥2.5 分的患者则没有获益。在此,我们研究了(1)在第三次(TACE-3)和第四次 TACE(TACE-4)之前,ART 评分的预后意义,以及(2)通过对多次 TACE 治疗的 HCC 患者进行 ART 评分的连续评估,以 ART 评分指导再次治疗策略的可行性。
109 例于 1999 年 1 月至 2009 年 12 月在维也纳和因斯布鲁克医科大学被诊断为中期 HCC 并接受了≥3 次 TACE 治疗的患者纳入本研究。在每次 TACE 治疗前,我们对 ART 评分与 TACE 治疗前的肝脏进行了评估。在 TACE-3 和 4 之前,我们评估了 ART 评分的预后性能,并在基于各自最后一次干预前的 ART 评分进行分层的情况下进行了评估。
在 TACE-3 前的 ART 评分可以将两组患者区分开来,并且在独立于 Child-Pugh 评分(5-7 分)、CRP 水平和肿瘤特征的情况下,仍然是 OS 的有效预测因子。即使在 TACE-2 前 ART 评分(0-1.5 分)初始有益的患者中,在 TACE-3 前再次评估 ART 评分也确定了一组预后不佳的患者(中位 OS:27.8 与 10.8 个月,p<0.001)。在应用于 TACE-4 之前,也观察到了类似的结果。
ART 评分的连续评估可以在每次 TACE 治疗前确定预后不佳的患者。