Liver resection versus transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND

The role of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) as the standard treatment for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is being challenged by increasing studies supporting liver resection (LR); but evidence of survival benefits of LR is lacking. We aimed to compare the overall survival (OS) of LR with that of TACE for the treatment of intermediate-stage HCC in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

A Markov model, comparing LR with TACE over 15 years, was developed based on the data from 31 literatures. Additionally, external validation of the model was performed using a data set (n = 1735; LR: 701; TACE: 1034) from a tertiary center with propensity score matching method. We conducted one-way and two-way sensitivity analyses, in addition to a Monte Carlo analysis with 10 000 patients allocated into each arm.

RESULTS

The mean expected survival times and survival rates at 5 years were 77.8 months and 47.1% in LR group, and 48.6 months and 25.7% in TACE group, respectively. Sensitivity analyses found that initial LR was the most favorable treatment. The 95% CI for the difference in OS was 2.42-2.46 years between the two groups (P < 0.001). In the validation set, the 5-year survival rates after LR were significantly better than those after TACE before (40.2% vs. 25.9%, P < 0.001) and after matching (43.2% vs 30.9%, P < 0.001), which was comparable to the model results.

CONCLUSIONS

For cirrhotic patients with resectable intermediate-stage HCC, LR may provide survival benefit over TACE, but large-scale studies are required to further stratify patients at this stage for different optimal treatments.